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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s arguments filed September 30, 2025 regarding the Restriction/Election of Species Requirement (Lack of Unity of Invention) mailed August 14, 2025 are persuasive. Accordingly, the Restriction/Election of Species Requirement is hereby withdrawn and all pending claims (i.e., claims 1-6 and 17-25) will be examined on the merits herein.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement(s) submitted on October 11, 2023 and April 14, 2025 is/are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement(s) is/are being considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they do not include the following reference sign(s) mentioned in the description: 60 (mentioned in paragraph [0024] of the specification). Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Objections
Claims 1 and 17 are objected to because of the following informalities: “drain” should read “the drain” (claim 1, line 20 and claim 17, line 21). Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Claims 1-6 and 17-25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
In claim 1, line 12, the limitation “a first data line” renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear if this element is the same as or different from “a first data line” previously recited in claim 1, lines 4-5. FIG. 1 shows, and the specification describes in paragraph [0022], one first data line 101. Therefore, it is suggested Applicant change “a first data line” in claim 1, line 12 to “the first data line”. For examination purposes, the limitation in question will be interpreted as: the first data line. Correction is respectfully requested.
In claim 1, line 13, the limitation “a second data line” renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear if this element is the same as or different from “a second data line” previously recited in claim 1, line 5. FIG. 1 shows, and the specification describes in paragraph [0022], one second data line 102. Therefore, it is suggested Applicant change “a second data line” in claim 1, line 13 to “the second data line”. For examination purposes, the limitation in question will be interpreted as: the second data line. Correction is respectfully requested.
In claim 3, lines 3-4, the limitation “an overlapping area of the drain and the gate of the first transistor” renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether this element is the same as or different from “an overlapping area of the drain and the gate of the first transistor” previously recited in claim 1, line 17. In the case of a top-gate thin film transistor (Figs. 2 and 3) or a bottom-gate thin film transistor (Figs. 4 and 5), the specification describes one overlapping area of the drain and the gate of the first transistor. Therefore, it is suggested Applicant change “an overlapping area of the drain and the gate of the first transistor” in claim 3, lines 3-4 to “the overlapping area of the drain and the gate of the first transistor”. For examination purposes, the limitation in question will be interpreted as: the overlapping area of the drain and the gate of the first transistor. Correction is respectfully requested.
In claim 3, lines 4-5, the limitation “an overlapping area of the drain and the gate of the second transistor” renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether this element is the same as or different from “an overlapping area of the drain and the gate of the second transistor” previously recited in claim 1, line 19. In the case of a top-gate thin film transistor (Figs. 2 and 3) or a bottom-gate thin film transistor (Figs. 4 and 5), the specification describes one overlapping area of the drain and the gate of the second transistor. Therefore, it is suggested Applicant change “an overlapping area of the drain and the gate of the second transistor” in claim 3, lines 4-5 to “the overlapping area of the drain and the gate of the second transistor”. For examination purposes, the limitation in question will be interpreted as: the overlapping area of the drain and the gate of the second transistor. Correction is respectfully requested.
In claim 17, line 13, the limitation “a first data line” renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear if this element is the same as or different from “a first data line” previously recited in claim 17, lines 5-6. FIG. 1 shows, and the specification describes in paragraph [0022], one first data line 101. Therefore, it is suggested Applicant change “a first data line” in claim 17, line 13 to “the first data line”. For examination purposes, the limitation in question will be interpreted as: the first data line. Correction is respectfully requested.
In claim 17, line 14, the limitation “a second data line” renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear if this element is the same as or different from “a second data line” previously recited in claim 17, line 6. FIG. 1 shows, and the specification describes in paragraph [0022], one second data line 102. Therefore, it is suggested Applicant change “a second data line” in claim 17, line 14 to “the second data line”. For examination purposes, the limitation in question will be interpreted as: the second data line. Correction is respectfully requested.
In claim 21, lines 1-2, the limitation “a thickness of the drain is greater than a thickness of the gate” renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear as to which transistor(s) Applicant refers. Claim 1 recites “each of the transistors comprises a drain and a gate” (line 11), “the drain and the gate of the first transistor” (line 17), “the drain and the gate of the second transistor” (line 19) and “a thickness of the gate of the first transistor is greater than a thickness of the gate of the second transistor” (lines 30-31). The specification describes in [0038]: “It can be understood that, as shown in FIG. 2, since the thickness of the drain D (including a portion of the drain D located in the via hole) is greater than the thickness H of the gate G.” However, it is unclear from the specification for which transistor(s) this thickness relationship is satisfied: the first transistor 301, the second transistor 302, or both. For examination purposes, the limitation in question will be interpreted as: in each of the first transistor and the second transistor, a thickness of the drain is greater than the thickness of the gate. Correction is respectfully requested.
Claim 22 recites the limitation "the cross section of the display panel" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is suggested Applicant change "the cross section of the display panel" to "a cross section of the display panel". For examination purposes, the limitation in question will be interpreted as: a cross section of the display panel. Correction is respectfully requested.
Claim 24 recites the limitation "the cross section of the display panel" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is suggested Applicant change "the cross section of the display panel" to "a cross section of the display panel". For examination purposes, the limitation in question will be interpreted as: a cross section of the display panel. Correction is respectfully requested.
In claim 25, lines 1-2, the limitation “further comprising a channel portion and two doped portions disposed at two sides of the channel portion” renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear as to portions of which element (i.e., which transistor). The specification describes in [0032]: “Specifically, both the active portion 303 of the top-gate structure and the active portion 303 of the bottom-gate structure include a channel portion 3031 and two doped portions (only schematically illustrated in FIG. 2) located at two sides of the channel portion 3031.” Therefore, it is suggested Applicant insert “in each of the transistors” between “further comprising” and “a channel portion and two doped portions disposed at two sides of the channel portion” as recited in claim 25, lines 1-2. For examination purposes, the limitation in question will be interpreted as: further comprising, in each of the transistors, a channel portion and two doped portions disposed at two sides of the channel portion. Correction is respectfully requested.
Claim 25 recites the limitation "the doped particles" in lines 5 and 6. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is suggested Applicant change “the doped particles” to “doped particles” (or preferably “dopants” which is the conventional term of art). For examination purposes, the limitation in question will be interpreted as: doped particles (dopants). Correction is respectfully requested.
Claims 2, 4-6, 18-20 and 23 are rejected because they depend, directly or indirectly, from at least one indefinite claim and therefore inherit the indefiniteness of said at least one indefinite claim.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claims 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends. Specifically, claim 18 fails to further limit the subject matter of claim 17 in view of claim 17, lines 18-21; claim 19 fails to further limit the subject matter of claim 18 in view of claim 17, lines 22-30; and claim 20 fails to further limit the subject matter of claim 19 in view of claim 17, lines 31-32. Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-6, 17 and 21-25 would be allowable if amended to overcome the rejections under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) and the objection set forth in this Office action.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the prior art of record, individually or in combination, does not teach or suggest “wherein an overlapping area of the drain and the gate of the first transistor in an area where the gate and the drain of the first transistor are arranged face to face is greater than an overlapping area of the drain and the gate of the second transistor in an area where the gate and drain of the second transistor are arranged face to face” and “the drain is disposed on one side of the gate away from the active portion; the drain comprises a first portion and a second portion, and the second portion is connected between the first portion and the active portion; wherein an area of an orthographic projection of the gate of the first transistor projected on the corresponding second portion is larger than an area of an orthographic projection of the gate of the second transistor projected on the corresponding second portion; and wherein a thickness of the gate of the first transistor is greater than a thickness of the gate of the second transistor” as recited in independent claims 1 and 17.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PETER M ALBRECHT whose telephone number is (571)272-7813. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:30 AM - 6:30 PM (CT).
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, Lynne Gurley can be reached at (571) 272-1670. 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.
/PETER M ALBRECHT/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2811