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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the following claim limitations must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s).
“a plurality of second power signal lines, extending along the second direction and located between the first power signal line and the base substrate, and the second power signal line and the second power signal sub-line being electrically connected through a via hole located in an insulating layer between the second power signal sub-line and the second power signal line; wherein the plurality of second power signal sub-lines comprises first signal sub-lines and second signal sub-lines alternately arranged along the first direction, in the first direction, a maximum size of the second power signal sub-line is greater than a maximum size of the first signal sub-line” (note bolded portion, claim 1)
“a plurality of sub-pixels, on the base substrate, wherein, in the first direction, the maximum size of the second power signal sub-line is greater than a size of an effective light-emitting region of at least one sub-pixel; at least one second power signal sub-line comprises a plurality of signal line segments arranged in the second direction and spaced apart from each other, in the second direction, a size of the signal line segment is greater than a size of an effective light-emitting region of at least one sub-pixel” (note the bolded portion, claim 2)
No new matter should be entered.
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. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. 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 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 1-20 are 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites the limitation ““a plurality of second power signal lines, extending along the second direction and located between the first power signal line and the base substrate, and the second power signal line and the second power signal sub-line being electrically connected through a via hole located in an insulating layer between the second power signal sub-line and the second power signal line; wherein the plurality of second power signal sub-lines comprises first signal sub-lines and second signal sub-lines alternately arranged along the first direction, in the first direction, a maximum size of the second power signal sub-line is greater than a maximum size of the first signal sub-line”. The limitation is ambiguous as it is not mappable to any of the drawings. To remove the ambiguity, the Examiner invites the applicant to map said bolded claim limitation to a specific drawing.
Claim 2 recites the limitations “the maximum size of the second power signal sub-line is greater than a size of an effective light-emitting region of at least one sub-pixel” and “a size of the signal line segment is greater than a size of an effective light-emitting region of at least one sub-pixel”. The limitations are ambiguous as it is not mappable to any of the drawings. To remove the ambiguity, the Examiner invites the applicant to map said bolded claim limitation to a specific drawing.
Claim 2 recites the limitations “the second power signal line” (line 3). It is unclear if it refers to “a plurality of second power signal lines” and or different feature. Correction/clarification is required.
Claim 2 recites the limitations “the signal line” in line 7. There is insufficient antecedent basis for said limitation in the claim.
Claim 3 recites the limitations “the second power signal line”, and “the second power signal sub-line”. It is unclear if they refer to “a plurality of second power signal lines” and “a plurality of second power signal sub-line” respectively or different features. Correction/clarification is required.
Claim 5 recites the limitations “adjacent first signal sub-lines”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for said limitation in the claim.
Claim 6 recites the limitations “the first power signal sub-line”. It is unclear if it refers to “a plurality of first power signal sub-lines” or different feature. Correction/clarification is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
As best understood, claims 1-2, 5 & 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and/or 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by YI et al. (US Pub. 2019/0131371).
Regarding claim 1, YI teaches a display substrate, comprising:
a base substrate 10;
a first power signal line PL on the base substrate, the first power signal line comprising a plurality of first power signal sub-lines (thin portions of PL) extending along a first direction and a plurality of second power signal sub-lines (thick portions of PL) extending along a second direction, wherein the first power signal sub-lines are connected with the second power signal sub-lines (see Fig. 4);
a plurality of second power signal lines VL, extending along the second direction and located between the first power signal line PL and the base substrate 10, and the second power signal line VL and the second power signal sub-line (thick portion of PL) being electrically connected through a via hole located in an insulating layer between the second power signal sub-line and the second power signal line (Fig. 3);
wherein the plurality of second power signal sub-lines VL comprises first signal sub-lines (thin portion of VL) and second signal sub-lines (thick portion of VL) alternately arranged along the first direction, in the first direction, a maximum size of the second power signal sub-line is greater than a maximum size of the first signal sub-line (see Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 2, YI teaches the display substrate according to claim 1, further comprising: a plurality of sub-pixels (PX2 & Px3, Fig. 2), on the base substrate 10, wherein, in the first direction, the maximum size of the second power signal sub-line is greater than a size of an effective light-emitting region of at least one sub-pixel; at least one second power signal sub-line comprises a plurality of signal line segments arranged in the second direction and spaced apart from each other, in the second direction, a size of the signal line segment is greater than a size of an effective light-emitting region of at least one sub-pixel. (Fig. 4-5 and associated text).
Regarding claim 5, YI teaches the display substrate according to claim 2, wherein adjacent first signal sub-lines are symmetrically distributed with respect to a center line between the adjacent first signal sub-lines (Fig. 4-5).
Regarding claim 20, YI teaches a display device, comprising the display substrate according to claim 1 (Fig. 4-5).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3-4, 6-8, 9-11 and 12-19 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.
Examiner’s Note
Some of the dependent claims are replete with inconsistent terms, similar to the limitations identified in the 112 rejection above. In the interest of clarity, the Examiner suggests that applicant look through the dependent claims and correct the inconsistent terms/limitations.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TIMOR KARIMY whose telephone number is (571)272-9006. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday: 8:30 AM -5:00 PM.
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.
/TIMOR KARIMY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2818
Prosecution Insights