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 .
Specification
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.
The following title is suggested:
DISPLAY PANEL AND DISPLAY DEVICE WITH CHANGING STORAGE CAPACITOR VALUES.
Claim Objections
Claim 31 is objected to under 37 CFR 1.75 as being a substantial duplicate of claim 1. When two claims in an application are duplicates or else are so close in content that they both cover the same thing, despite a slight difference in wording, it is proper after allowing one claim to object to the other as being a substantial duplicate of the allowed claim. See MPEP § 608.01(m).
Claim 1 is directed to a display panel. Claim 31 is a substantial duplicate of claim 1, with the additional limitation of a display device comprising a display panel equivalent to claim 1. Since a display panel is a type of display device, the scope of claim 31 is substantially equal to that of claim 1. Accordingly, claim 31 is objected to under. 37 CFR 1.75.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], 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.
Claim 32 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends.
Claim 32 is directed to a display device, comprising the display panel of claim 23. Since a display panel is a type of display device, claim 32 fails to further limit the subject matter of claim 23.
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 1-3, 5-10 and 23-30 are allowed.
The following is a statement of reasons for allowance: The prior art fails to teach or clearly suggest the limitations stating:
“odd-numbered layers of the electrode plates are electrically connected to each other, and even-numbered layers of the electrode plates are electrically connected to each other;
two adjacent layers of the electrode plates overlap and are electrically insulated with each other;
a total overlapping area of the electrode plates of the storage capacitor is equal to a sum of overlapping areas between any two adjacent layers of the electrode plates” as recited in claim 1, and
“in the second display region, capacitance values change in storage capacitors of respective ones of the pixel driving circuits sequentially connected to a same one of the data leads;
wherein, along a direction away from the binding region, the capacitance values decrease in the storage capacitors of the respective ones of the pixel driving circuits located in the second display region and connected to the same one of the data leads” as recited in claim 23.
Bae (PG Pub. No. US 20200312934 A1) teaches storage capacitors (Cst) included in pixel regions (P) and connected to a data line (DL) extending in a direction away from a binding region (PCB-P/150), but fails to teach the storage capacitor values decreasing along the data line in a direction away from the binding region.
Zhao (PG Pub. No. US 2020/0219443 A1) teaches capacitor values (C1) decreasing along a data line (30) toward a data signal output (fig. 2: C1 decreases along 30 in a direction toward 50). However, Zhao fails to explicitly teach the capacitor values decrease along a direction away from a binding region.
Sun et al. (US 2006/0273994 A1) teaches a display panel with decreasing storage capacitor values across a pixel array (¶ 0023), but fails to teach the capacitor values decrease along a data line in a direction away from a binding region.
Claims 2-3, 5-10 and 24-30 depend on claims 1 and 23, and are allowed for the same reasons.
Claim 31 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the double patent objections set forth in this Office action.
Claim 32 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see page 10, filed 6/29/2026, with respect to the 35 USC § 112 rejections of claims 1-2 and 6 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Accordingly, these rejections have been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments, see page 10, with respect to the 35 USC § 103 rejections of claims 1, 23 and 31, have been fully considered and are persuasive. Accordingly, these rejections have been withdrawn.
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 BRIAN TURNER whose telephone number is (571)270-5411. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8am-5pm.
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, Eva Montalvo can be reached at 571-270-3829. 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.
/BRIAN TURNER/ Examiner, Art Unit 2818
Prosecution Insights