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 .
DETAILED ACTION
In response to an Office action mailed on 02/11/2026 (“02-11-26 OA”), the Applicant amended the independent claim 1 on 05/11/2026 ("05-11-26 Response”), which substantively changed the scope of claim 1 and the scope of its dependent claims 2-15.
The Applicant amended the title in the 05-11-26 Response.
Currently, claims 1-33 are pending with withdrawn claims 16-33 remaining withdrawn.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s amendments to the title have overcome the objection to the Specification as set forth on page 2 under line item number 1 of the 02-11-26 OA.
Despite the substantive amendments to the independent claim 1, previously-cited Chen reads on the amended independent claim 1, infra.
The first amended feature of “wherein the shield line extends along the repair line” is reasonably broad to encompass an interpretation of “wherein the shield line extends along side the repair line.”
The second amended feature of “shielding line is not directly connected with the pixel electrode and the repair line” appears to define the structural relationship between the shield line with respect to the pixel electrode and the repair line with a negative limitation of “not directly connected.” There is nothing inherently wrong with defining an invention negatively, but to do so would attempt to define the claimed invention by what it is not rather than what it is. Here, the shielding line 508 of Chen is not directly connected with the pixel electrode 509 and the repair line 504 at a source 502.
For the reasons above, Chen reads on the amended independent claim 1.
Despite the substantive amendments to the independent claim 1, previously-cited Shim reads on the amended independent claim 1, infra.
The first amended feature of “wherein the shield line extends along the repair line” is reasonably broad to encompass an interpretation of “wherein the shield line extends along side the repair line.”
The second amended feature of “shielding line is not directly connected with the pixel electrode and the repair line” appears to define the structural relationship between the shield line with respect to the pixel electrode and the repair line with a negative limitation of “not directly connected.” There is nothing inherently wrong with defining an invention negatively, but to do so would attempt to define the claimed invention by what it is not rather than what it is. Here, the shielding line SHL of Shim is not directly connected with the pixel electrode ANO and the repair line RP (see the cross-sectional view shown in Fig. 4).
Substantive amendments to the independent claim 1 required further consideration and search. New grounds of rejection are provided below.
A. Prior-art rejection based on Chen
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 1021
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1-4 and 7-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Chen (previously-cited Pub. No. US 2018/0294443 A1 to Chen).
Fig. 4 and 5 of Chen have been provided to support the rejection below:
PNG
media_image1.png
310
238
media_image1.png
Greyscale
[AltContent: textbox (P1)][AltContent: arrow]
PNG
media_image2.png
206
228
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding independent claim 1, Chen teaches a display device (see Figs. 1 and 2; see also Figs. 4 and 5) comprising:
a pixel electrode 509 (para [0037] - “anode 509”; para [0007] - “…connecting the first route end of the transistor on the display pixel required to be repaired and the second route end, and applying the second reference voltage continuously to the anode of the OLED on the display pixel required to be repair.”);
a pixel circuit T7 (para [0013] - “FIG. 4 is a schematic view of a TFT and peripheral circuits of the embodiment shown in FIG. 2.”; para [0014] - FIG. 5 is a schematic view of the TFT T7 of the embodiment shown in FIG. 4.”) connected to the pixel electrode 509;
a repair line 504 (para [0034] - “The gate 504 may be broken down within an interval area between the first pattern area 506 of the semiconductor pattern 501 and the scanning line 505.”) overlapping at least a part of the pixel circuit T7; and
a shielding line 508 (para [0035] - “A second end of the first pattern area 506 connects with the anode via the drain 503, and a second end of the second pattern area 508 connects with the power supply wires 507 via the source 502. “ A limitation of “shielding” is a statement of an intended use so it may not structurally distinguish the claimed line over the line 508 taught by Chen.) overlapping at least a part of the repair line 504 and connected to a constant power source 507,
wherein the shielding line 508 extends along side the repair line 504, and
the shielding line 508 is not directly connected with the pixel electrode 509 and the repair line 504 at a source 502.
Regarding claim 2, Chen teaches the shielding line 508 that overlaps at least a part of a remaining portion of the repair line 504 for a repair short portion of the repair line (A limitation of “for a repair short portion of the repair line” is a statement of intended use that may not structurally distinguish the claimed display device over the display device taught by Chen, because the repair short portion is operationally optional as the repair line may never short.).
Regarding claim 3, Chen teaches the shielding line 508 that overlaps an entire remaining portion of the repair line 504 except for the repair short portion (A limitation of “for the repair short portion” is a statement of intended use that may not structurally distinguish the claimed display device over the display device taught by Chen, because the repair short portion is operationally optional as the repair line may never short.).
Regarding claim 4, Chen teaches the shielding line 508 comprises:
a line portion extending in a first direction (up); and
a protrusion extending in a second direction (right) crossing the first direction and overlapping at least a part of the repair line 504.
Regarding claim 7, Chen teaches the part P1 of the shielding line 508 that is disposed between the repair line 504 and the pixel electrode 509.
Regarding claim 8, Chen teaches the part P2 of the shielding line 508 that is disposed between the repair line 504 and the pixel electrode 509 in an overlapping area between the repair line 504 and the pixel electrode 509.
Regarding claim 9, Chen teaches the shielding line 508 and the repair line 504 that are disposed in different layers from each other.
Regarding claim 10, Chen teaches a power line 507 electrically connected to the pixel circuit T7,
wherein at least a part of the shielding line 508 further overlaps the power line 507.
Regarding claim 11, Chen teaches the shielding line 508 that extends in a direction crossing the power line 507.
Regarding claim 12, Chen teaches the constant power source (of the power supply wire 507) provides a reference voltage Vi (para [0039] - “…wherein the first route end 604 of the transistor T7 connects with the power supply wires 605 and connects to the second reference voltage Vi via the power supply wires 605.”; see Fig. 6).
Regarding claim 13, Chen teaches the shielding line 508 that is electrically connected to the pixel circuit T7.
B. Prior-art rejection based on Shim
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
Claims 1-3, 6-9, 14 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) or 35 U.S.C. (a)(2) as being anticipated by Shim (previously-cited Pub. No. US 2023/0209894 A1 to Shim et al.).
Fig. 3 and Fig. 4 of Shim have been provided to support the rejection below:
PNG
media_image3.png
679
435
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
376
614
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Regarding independent claim 1, Shim teaches a display device (see Fig. 1; see also Figs. 3 and 4) comprising:
a pixel electrode ANO (para [0052] - “…and the driving drain electrode DD may be connected to an anode electrode ANO of the light emitting diode OLE.”);
a pixel circuit ST and/or DT (para [0052] - “The driving thin film transistor DT may play a role of driving the light emitting diode OLE of the selected pixel by the switching thin film transistor ST.”) connected to the pixel electrode ANO (via contact hole PH);
a repair line RP (para [0082] - “The repair element RP may be referred to an element that cuts connectivity with a thin film transistor allocated on an anode electrode of a detective pixel, and connects to a driving thin film transistor allocated to an neighboring normal pixel, when a defect occurs.”) overlapping at least a part of the pixel electrode ANO; and
a shielding line SHL (para [0076] - “a repair shield layer SHL”) overlapping at least a part of the repair line RP and connected to a constant power source VDD (A limitation of “connected to a constant power source” can be reasonable construed as a statement of intended capability or use. When the repair element RP and the repair shield layer SHL becomes welded together as described in para [0070], then the SHL will be at the voltage level that the DD1 is at. para [0079] - “The first repair electrode RT1 may be connected to the first driving drain electrode DD1 connected to the first anode electrode ANO1 disposed at the first pixel P1.”),
wherein the shielding line SHL extends along side the repair line RP, and
the shielding line SHL is not directly connected with the pixel electrode ANO and the repair line RP (see cross-sectional view shown in Fig. 4).
Regarding claim 2, Shim teaches the shielding line SHL that overlaps at least a part of a remaining portion RL of the repair line RP for a repair short portion of the repair line (A limitation of “for a repair short portion of the repair line” is a statement of intended use that may not structurally distinguish the claimed display device over the display device taught by Shim, because the repair short portion is operationally optional as the repair line may never short.).
Regarding claim 3, Shim teaches the shielding line SHL that overlaps an entire remaining portion RL of the repair line RP except for the repair short portion (A limitation of “for the repair short portion” is a statement of intended use that may not structurally distinguish the claimed display device over the display device taught by Shim, because the repair short portion is operationally optional as the repair line may never short.).
Regarding claim 6, Shim teaches a part of the shielding line SHL that overlaps the pixel electrode ANO.
Regarding claim 7, Shim teaches the part of the shielding line SHL that is disposed between the repair line RP and the pixel electrode ANO.
Regarding claim 8, Shim teaches the part of the shielding line SHL that is disposed between the repair line RP and the pixel electrode ANO in an overlapping area between the repair line RP and the pixel electrode ANO.
Regarding claim 9, Shim teaches the shielding line SHL and the repair line RP that are disposed in different layers from each other.
Regarding claim 14, Shim teaches the pixel circuit ST, DT or DT connected to a pixel connection electrode DD (para [0071] - “The driving drain electrode DD”), and
the repair line RP at least partially overlaps the pixel connection electrode DD of the pixel circuit ST, DT or DT.
Regarding claim 15, Shim teaches the repair line RP that is connected to the pixel connection electrode DD of the pixel circuit ST, DT or DT.
Allowable Subject Matter
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Claim 5 is objected to for depending on a rejected base claim 1 and the intervening claim 4, but would be allowable if it is rewritten in independent form to include all of the limitations of the base claim 1 and the intervening claim 4 or the base claim 1 is amended to include all of the limitations of claim 5 and the intervening
claim 4.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL JUNG whose telephone number is (408)918-7554. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30 A.M. to 7 P.M.
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, Eliseo Ramos-Feliciano, can be reached at (571) 272-7925. 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.
/MICHAEL JUNG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2817 27 May 2026
1 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 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
Prosecution Insights