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 § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 6, 8 and 15 were rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claims contain subject matter which were not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. Claim 6, which depends ultimately on independent claim 1 recites, inter alia, “the shapes of the first pixel, the second pixel, and the first division pixel are substantially similar”. Amended independent claim 1 is represented by Figs. 3, 10, 12 and 15. However, none of the Figures show the first pixel, the second pixel, and the first division pixel are substantially similar.
Claim 8, which depends ultimately on independent claim 1 recites, inter alia, “shapes of the first division pixel and the second division pixel are different.”. Amended independent claim 1 is represented by Figs. 3, 10, 12 and 15. However, none of the Figures show shapes of the first division pixel and the second division pixel are different.
Claim 15, which depends ultimately on independent claim 1 recites, inter alia, “at least one of the first pixel, the second pixel, the first division pixel, or the second division pixel aligned in parallel to a horizontal side or a vertical side of the pixel areas is not aligned with others of the pixels by being offset in a horizontal direction or in a vertical direction”. Amended independent claim 1 is represented by Figs. 3, 10, 12 and 15. However, none of the Figures show at least one of the first pixel, the second pixel, the first division pixel, or the second division pixel aligned in parallel to a horizontal side or a vertical side of the pixel areas is not aligned with others of the pixels by being offset in a horizontal direction or in a vertical direction.
The Applicant has asserted that the amendments to the claims do not add new subject matter but has failed to specify areas of the specification and/or drawing where support could be found for claims 6 and 15. The Examiner could not locate either in the drawing or in the specification any support for these claims. Appropriate correction/clarification is requested.
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.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 6, 8 and 15 were rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention. Claim 6, which depends ultimately on independent claim 1 recites, inter alia, “the shapes of the first pixel, the second pixel, and the first division pixel are substantially similar”. Amended independent claim 1 is represented by Figs. 3, 10, 12 and 15. However, none of the Figures show the first pixel, the second pixel, and the first division pixel are substantially similar.
Claim 8, which depends ultimately on independent claim 1 recites, inter alia, “shapes of the first division pixel and the second division pixel are different.”. Amended independent claim 1 is represented by Figs. 3, 10, 12 and 15. However, none of the Figures show shapes of the first division pixel and the second division pixel are different.
Claim 15, which depends ultimately on independent claim 1 recites, inter alia, “at least one of the first pixel, the second pixel, the first division pixel, or the second division pixel aligned in parallel to a horizontal side or a vertical side of the pixel areas is not aligned with others of the pixels by being offset in a horizontal direction or in a vertical direction”. Amended independent claim 1 is represented by Figs. 3, 10, 12 and 15. However, none of the Figures show at least one of the first pixel, the second pixel, the first division pixel, or the second division pixel aligned in parallel to a horizontal side or a vertical side of the pixel areas is not aligned with others of the pixels by being offset in a horizontal direction or in a vertical direction.
The Applicant has asserted that the amendments to the claims do not add new subject matter but has failed to specify areas of the specification and/or drawing where support could be found for claims 6 and 15. The Examiner could not locate either in the drawing or in the specification any support for claims. Appropriate correction/clarification is requested.
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 1-3, 7, 9-14, 16-21 and 23-27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Zhang et al. (Pub. No.: US 2021/0264850 A1).
Regarding Claim 1, Zhang et al. discloses a light-emitting display device comprising: pixel areas (Par. 0019; Figs. 2-3 – pixel area 100); and pixels respectively positioned in the pixel areas, and respectively comprising a first pixel, a second pixel, and a third pixel for displaying respective colors (Par. 0019; Figs. 2-3 – first pixel 02, second pixel 03 and third pixel 01),
PNG
media_image1.png
620
588
media_image1.png
Greyscale
wherein the third pixel comprises a first division pixel and a second division pixel spaced in a first diagonal direction, and configured to display a same color (Par. 0019-0022; Figs. 2-3), and wherein the first division pixel has a long shape extending in a first longitudinal direction, and the second division pixel has a long shape extending in a second longitudinal direction perpendicular to the first longitudinal direction (Par. 0019-0022; Figs. 2-3).
Regarding Claim 2, Zhang et al., as applied to claim 1, discloses
the light-emitting display device, wherein the first pixel and the second pixel are spaced in a second diagonal direction crossing the first diagonal direction (Figs. 2-3).
Regarding Claim 3, Zhang et al., as applied to claim 1, discloses
the light-emitting display device, wherein shapes of the first division pixel and the second division pixel are substantially similar (Figs. 2-3).
Regarding Claim 7, Zhang et al., as applied to claim 3, discloses
the light-emitting display device, wherein shapes of the first pixel and the second pixel are different (Figs. 2-3).
Regarding Claim 9, Zhang et al., as applied to claim 1, discloses
the light-emitting display device, wherein a shape of the second division pixel is substantially similar to a shape of the first division pixel rotated 90 degrees (Figs. 2-3).
Regarding Claim 10, Zhang et al., as applied to claim 9, discloses
the light-emitting display device, wherein sizes of the first division pixel and the second division pixel are substantially similar (Figs. 2-3).
Regarding Claim 11, Zhang et al., as applied to claim 10, discloses
the light-emitting display device, wherein sizes of the first pixel and the second pixel are different (Figs. 2-3).
Regarding Claim 12, Zhang et al., as applied to claim 1, discloses
the light-emitting display device, wherein the pixel areas are respectively quadrangular, and are repeatedly arranged in a lattice form (Figs. 2-3).
Regarding Claim 13, Zhang et al., as applied to claim 12, discloses
the light-emitting display device, wherein the first division pixel is adjacent to at least one of the first pixel or the second pixel of an adjacent one of the pixel areas (Figs. 2-3).
Regarding Claim 14, Zhang et al., as applied to claim 13, discloses
the light-emitting display device, wherein the first division pixel is not adjacent to any other first division pixel or second division pixel in the adjacent one of the pixel areas (Figs. 2-3).
Regarding Claim 16, Zhang et al., as applied to claim 1, discloses
the light-emitting display device, wherein the third pixel is configured to emit green light, and wherein one of the first pixel and the second pixel is configured to emit red light, while the other of the first pixel and the second pixel is configured to emit blue light. (Par. 0022).
Regarding Claim 17, Zhang et al., as applied to claim 1, discloses
the light-emitting display device, wherein the third pixel is configured to emit red light, and wherein one of the first pixel and the second pixel is configured to emit green light, and the other of the first pixel and the second pixel is configured to emit blue light (Par. 0022).
Regarding Claim 18, Zhang et al., as applied to claim 1, discloses
the light-emitting display device, wherein the third pixel is configured to emit blue light, and wherein one of the first pixel and the second pixel is configured to emit red light, and the other of the first pixel and the second pixel is configured to emit green light (Par. 0022).
Regarding Claim 19, Zhang et al., as applied to claim 1, discloses
the light-emitting display device, wherein any one of the first pixel, the second pixel, and the third pixel comprises a polygonal shape (Fig. 3).
Regarding Claim 20, Zhang et al., as applied to claim 1, discloses
the light-emitting display device, wherein any one of the first pixel, the second pixel, and the third pixel comprises a circular or oval shape (Fig. 2).
Regarding Claim 21, Zhang et al., as applied to claim 1, discloses
the light-emitting display device, wherein any one of the first pixel, the second pixel, and the third pixel comprises a shape of a figure having inwardly curved sides (Figs 2-3).
Regarding Claim 23, Zhang et al. discloses a light-emitting display device comprising: pixel areas (Par. 0019; Figs. 2-3 – pixel area 100); and
PNG
media_image1.png
620
588
media_image1.png
Greyscale
pixels positioned in the pixel areas, and comprising a first pixel, a second pixel, and a third pixel for displaying respective colors (Par. 0019-0022; Figs. 2-3– first pixel 02, second pixel 03 and third pixel 01), wherein the third pixel comprises a first division pixel and a second division pixel that are configured to display a same color (Par. 0019-0022; Figs. 2-3), and wherein the first division pixel is adjacent to the first pixel in a first direction, and is adjacent to the second pixel in a second direction, while the second division pixel is adjacent to the first pixel in the second direction, and is adjacent to the second pixel in the first direction (Par. 0019-0022; Figs. 2-3), and wherein the first division pixel has a long shape extending in a first longitudinal direction, and the second division pixel has a long shape extending in a second longitudinal direction perpendicular to the first longitudinal direction (Par. 0019-0022; Figs. 2-3).
Regarding Claim 24, Zhang et al., as applied to claim 23, discloses
the light-emitting display device, wherein the first division pixel and the second division pixel are not adjacent to each other in the first direction or in the second direction (Fig. 1/2/3/4/5/6).
Regarding Claim 25, Zhang et al., as applied to claim 23, discloses
the light-emitting display device, wherein the pixel areas are configured to be driven separately from each other (implied).
Regarding Claim 26, Zhang et al., as applied to claim 25, discloses
the light-emitting display device, wherein the pixel areas are arranged in a lattice form along the first direction and the second direction, which is perpendicular to the first direction, wherein the first pixel, the second pixel, the first division pixel, and the second division pixel are arranged along first and second rows parallel to the first direction, wherein the second pixel and the first division pixel are alternately arranged in the first row, wherein the first pixel and the second division pixel are alternately arranged in the second row, and wherein the first division pixel does not overlap the second division pixel in the second direction (Figs. 2-3).
Regarding Claim 27, Zhang et al., as applied to claim 23, discloses
the light-emitting display device, wherein the pixel areas are quadrangular, wherein only the first division pixel and the second division pixel are arranged in a first diagonal direction of the pixel areas, and wherein only the first pixel and the second pixel are arranged in a second diagonal direction of the pixel areas (Figs. 2-3).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 of this title, 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.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim 22 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Zhang et al. (Pub. No.: US 2021/0264850 A1), as applied to claim 1, further in view of Huang et al. (Pub. No. : US 2015/0109188 A1).
Regarding Claim 22, Zhang et al., as applied to claim 1, does not explicitly disclose
the light-emitting display device, wherein the first division pixel and the second division pixel are configured to be driven by a same signal.
However, Huang et al., at least implicitly teaches the light-emitting display device, wherein the first division pixel and the second division pixel are configured to be driven by a same signal (Par. 0009, 0042-0047; Fig. 3 – this prior art teaches that one of the sub-pixels is split into two secondary sub-pixels and both emitting the same color of light, they are driven by the same data line simultaneously ). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to use the teachings of Huang et al. the light-emitting display device, wherein the first division pixel and the second division pixel of Zhang et al. are configured to be driven by a same signal in order to achieve the desired emission characteristics.
Response to Arguments
Applicants’ arguments filed on 06/30/2026 have been fully considered but they are moot because of the new grounds of rejection necessitated by amendments made to the claims.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4-5 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 extension fee 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 SYED I GHEYAS whose telephone number is (571)272-0592. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday from 8:30 AM - 5:30 PM EST.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Britt Hanley, can be reached at telephone number (571)270-3042. 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://portal.uspto.gov/external/portal. Should you have questions about access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
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.
07/20/2026
/SYED I GHEYAS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2893
Prosecution Insights