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 .
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.
Claim 7-8 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.
Regarding claim 7:
It recites “each of the first metal lines is configured to supply an initialization voltage to the display panel.” But as now recited in claim 1, at least some of the lines supply a bias voltage. Therefore “each” line does not supply an initialization voltage. This combination of subject matter is contradictory.
Regarding claim 8:
It recites “each of the first metal lines is configured to supply an anode reset voltage to the display panel.” But as now recited in claim 1, at least some of the lines supply a bias voltage. Therefore “each” line does not supply an initialization voltage. This combination of subject matter is contradictory.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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, 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.
Claim(s) 1-10 and 18-27 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ko et al. (US 2024/0260342) in view of Cai et al. (US 2025/0234725) and further in view of Wei et al. (US 2024/0153428) and further in view of Biswas et al. (US 2018/0151496)
Regarding claim 1:
Ko discloses some but not every element of the claim as follows:
Claim 1
Ko
A display device (abstract) comprising:
Abstract
a display panel including a display area and a non-display area;
It is a display panel (abstract) – Ko does not explicitly show a non-display area
first metal lines in a first layer starting to extend from the non-display area and extending in a row direction into the display area, wherein the first metal lines are separated each other in a column direction, and each of the first metal lines is separated into portions separated from each other in the row direction by a predetermined spacing; and
Paragraph 51: “the third conductive layer may include a plurality of first signal lines VDD,” as shown in Fig. 3. Note that in the figure these extend in what might be considered a column direction, but Ko only states X “may be” a row direction and Y “may be” a column direction (paragraph 55), so they could be reversed.
Ko does not disclose these extend from the non-display area into the display area.
second metal lines disposed in a second layer, wherein each of the second metal lines extends in the column direction from a first point overlapping an end of the portions of one first metal line to a second point overlapping another first metal line separated from the one first metal line in the column direction,
Paragraph 51: “the fourth conductive layer may include a plurality of connection line segments 4,” as shown in Fig. 3
Again, which is the column and which is the row direction is arbitrary.
wherein a first contact hole is positioned at the first point and connects the one first metal line and the corresponding second metal line to each other,
Paragraph 51: “the same line connection segment 4 may be connected to multiple first signal lines VDD through via holes H,” as seen in Fig. 3.
wherein a second contact hole is positioned at the second point and connects the another first metal line and the corresponding second metal line to each other,
As seen in in Fig. 3
wherein one side of the corresponding second metal line is connected to the one first metal line via a connection line of the first contact hole at the first point,
As seen in Fig. 3
wherein another side of the corresponding second metal line is connected to the another first metal line via a connection line of the second contact hole at the second point,
As seen in Fig. 3
wherein in a plan view of the display device, the first metal lines and the second metal lines form a mesh structure.
As seen in Fig. 3
wherein the display panel includes:
two adjacent first metal lines for supplying a bias voltage disposed on a protective film and separated from each other by a predetermined spacing;
Ko has first metal lines as discussed above, but doesn't state they are "for supplying a bias voltage"
a first middle layer for planarization disposed on the two adjacent first metal lines; and
Ko Fig. 19: 64
the second metal line for supplying the bias voltage disposed on the first middle layer, wherein the second metal line has a length equal to the predetermined spacing between the two adjacent first metal lines, wherein both opposing ends of the second metal line in a length direction pass through the first middle layer and are electrically connected to the two adjacent first metal lines via two contact holes.
Ko has second metal lines as discussed above, connected via contact holes as seen in Fig. 3, but does not disclose they are "for supplying the bias voltage" or "a length equal to the predetermined spacing between the two adjacent first metal lines"
Therefore Ko does not disclose:
(A) the display panel includes a display area “and a non-display area;”
(B) the first metal lines in the first layer “starting to extend from the non-display area and extending in a row direction into the display area,”
(C) the lines are "for supplying a bias voltage"
(D) "wherein the second metal line has a length equal to the predetermined spacing between the two adjacent first metal lines"
Regarding (A) and (B):
Cai discloses:
the display panel includes a display area and a non-display area (e.g., Fig. 1: display region AA and peripheral region BB)
the first metal lines in the first layer starting to extend from the non-display area and extending in a row direction into the display area (e.g., Fig. 7a: line 121, as per paragraphs 135-136).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to include in Ko the elements taught by Kai.
The rationale is as follows:
Ko and Cai are directed to the same field of art.
Ko almost certainly has this, since the power lines must come from somewhere. But Ko doesn’t explicitly show it. Cai shows how they could be structured, allowing the device to function. One of ordinary skill in the art could have included this with predictable results.
Regarding (C):
Wei discloses:
Lines configured to supply a bias voltage to the display panel (e.g., Fig. 2, the voltage is bias sub-circuit 126)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to include in Ko in view of Cai wherein each of the first metal lines is configured to supply a bias voltage to the display panel, as suggested by Wei.
The rationale is as follows:
Ko, Cai and Wei are directed to the same field of art.
Ko discloses any of the lines can be constructed in this way, but Ko does not have a bias voltage line. Wei discloses including this can, e.g., alleviate poor display due to the lag phenomenon (paragraph 44). This is a known improvement that one of ordinary skill in the art could have included with predictable results.
Regarding (D):
Note that in, e.g., Ko Fig. 3, the length of the second metal lines are equal to the spacing between first ones, but because multiple lines are connected it is not necessarily the length of “adjacent” first metal lines. Ko does disclose that there could be different numbers of lines connected (paragraph 55), and if that number were two this would be true in Ko, but Ko does not explicitly show this configuration.
Biswas discloses:
wherein the second metal line has a length equal to the predetermined spacing between the two adjacent first metal lines (e.g., Fig. 8c, where as per paragraph 186 the stub distance is based on manufacturing tolerances and so could be equal).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to include in Ko, etc., the elements taught by Biswas.
The rationale is as follows:
Ko, etc., and Biswas are directed to the same field of art.
Biswas shows just two adjacent lines could be connected, which would result in the claimed configuration. Given that Ko already says the number of connected lines can be adjusted, this is certainly obvious from that and that Biswas explicitly shows this configuration.
Regarding claim 2:
Ko, etc., discloses:
wherein each of the first metal lines and the second metal lines comprises one or an alloy of two or more of molybdenum (Mo), aluminum (Al), chromium (Cr), gold (Au), titanium (Ti), nickel (Ni), neodymium (Nd), and copper (Cu) (Ko paragraph 71).
Regarding claim 3:
Ko, etc., discloses:
wherein the display device further comprises gate lines spaced from each other in the column direction (Ko paragraph 63, or Cai paragraph 110) and starting to extend from the non-display area and extending in the row direction into the display area (e..g., in Cai Fig. 7b they extend from the gate drivers 10).
Regarding claim 4:
Ko, etc., discloses:
wherein the non-display area includes a bezel area disposed on a front surface of the display panel (in Cai Fig. 1, areas B1, B2, B3, and B4 are all bezel areas).
Regarding claim 5:
Ko, etc., discloses:
wherein each of the gate lines is made of one or an alloy of two or more of magnesium (Mg), molybdenum (Mo), aluminum (Al), chromium (Cr), gold (Au), titanium (Ti), nickel (Ni), neodymium (Nd), and copper (Cu) (Ko paragraph 63).
Regarding claim 6:
Ko, etc., discloses:
wherein each of the first metal lines is configured to supply a bias voltage to the display panel (taught by Wei as discussed above).
Regarding claim 7:
Ko, etc., discloses:
wherein each of the first metal lines acts is configured to supply an initialization voltage to the display panel (Ko paragraph 54).
Regarding claim 8:
Ko, etc., discloses:
wherein each of the first metal lines is configured to supply an anode reset voltage to the display panel (Ko has a reset line as per paragraph 63, and in paragraph 54 says this same structure can be used for other lines).
Regarding claim 9:
Ko, etc., discloses:
wherein the first metal lines comprises a first line configured to supply a bias voltage, a second line configured to provide an initialization voltage, and a third line configured to supply an anode reset voltage (discussed individually above).
Regarding claim 10:
Ko, etc., discloses:
wherein the first metal lines includes two adjacent first metal lines for supplying a bias voltage (that they are for a bias voltage is taught by Wei above – otherwise these are the line structure taught by Ko) disposed on a protective film (Ko Fig. 19: 62) and separated from each other by a predetermined spacing, wherein a first middle layer for planarization is disposed on the two adjacent first metal lines and the protective film (Ko Fig. 19: 64), wherein a second metal line is configured to supply the bias voltage and has a length equal to the predetermined spacing between the two adjacent first metal lines (Ko Fig. 19: 4), wherein the second metal line is disposed on the first middle layer (as seen in Fig. 19), wherein both opposing ends in a length direction of the second metal line pass through the first middle layer and are electrically connected to the two adjacent first metal lines for supplying the bias voltage via two contact holes (as discussed earlier).
Regarding claim 18:
All elements positively recited have already been identified with respect to earlier rejections. No further elaboration is necessary.
Regarding claim 19:
Ko, etc., discloses:
wherein the display panel includes:
a light-emitting element including a first electrode as a fifth node, and a second electrode connected to a low potential driving voltage (Ko Fig. 1: OLED, connected to VSS);
a driving transistor including a second electrode connected to a third node, a first electrode connected to a second node, and a gate electrode connected to a first node (Ko Fig. 1: T3);
a first transistor including a first electrode connected to the third node, a second electrode connected to the first node, and a first gate electrode receiving a first scan signal (Ko Fig. 1: T2);
a fifth transistor including a second electrode connected to the second node, a first electrode receiving a bias voltage, and a fifth gate electrode receiving a third scan signal (this is taught by Wei as discussed above – see Wei Fig. 2B where this is element T8);
a sixth transistor including a second electrode connected to a fifth node, a first electrode receiving an anode reset voltage, and a sixth gate electrode receiving the third scan signal (Ko Fig. 1: T7);
a seventh transistor including a second electrode connected to the first node, a first electrode receiving an initialization voltage, and a seventh gate electrode receiving a fourth scan signal (Ko Fig. 1: T1); and
a storage capacitor connecting the first node and the fourth node to each other (Ko Fig. 1: C).
Regarding claim 20:
Ko, etc., discloses:
wherein the display panel further includes:
a second transistor including a second electrode connected to the second node, a first electrode receiving a data voltage, and a second gate electrode receiving a second scan signal (Ko Fig. 1: T4);
a third transistor including a second electrode connected to the second node, a first electrode connected to the fourth node to receive a high potential driving voltage therefrom, and a third gate electrode to receive a light-emission control signal (Ko Fig. 1: T5); and
a fourth transistor including a first electrode connected to the third node, a second electrode connected to the fifth node, and a fourth gate electrode connected to a light-emission signal line (Ko Fig. 1: T6).
Regarding claim 21:
Ko, etc., discloses:
wherein when the fifth transistor has been turned on, the bias voltage is applied to the driving transistor through a first metal line for supplying the bias voltage among the at least two or more first metal lines (follows from the combination).
Regarding claim 22:
Ko, etc., discloses:
wherein when the sixth transistor has been turned on, the anode reset voltage is applied to an anode electrode as the first electrode of the light-emitting element through a first metal line for supplying the anode reset voltage among the at least two or more first metal lines (Ko paragraph 54 discloses this structure can be used for the reset line).
Regarding claim 23:
Ko, etc., discloses:
wherein when the first transistor and the seventh transistor have been turned on, the initialization voltage is applied to the gate electrode of the driving transistor connected to the first node through a first metal line for supplying the initialization voltage among the at least two or more first metal lines (follows from Ko Fig. 1, where the initialization voltage could be one of the metal lines as per Ko paragraph 54)
Regarding claim 24:
Ko, etc., discloses:
wherein the display device further comprises at least two or more scan lines spaced from each other and starting to extend from the non-display area and extending in a row direction into the display area (Cai paragraph 110).
Regarding claim 25:
Ko, etc., discloses:
wherein the fifth transistor and the sixth transistor are turned on based on a third scan signal applied thereto through a third scan line among the at least two or more scan lines (these can be based on the same scan signal as per Wei paragraph 71), wherein the seventh transistor is turned on based on a fourth scan signal applied thereto through a fourth scan line among the at least two or more scan lines (Ko Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 26:
All elements positively recited have already been identified with respect to earlier rejections. No further elaboration is necessary.
Regarding claim 27:
Ko, etc., discloses:
a charge amount for a gate line and a charge amount for the first fragmented metal line pair is maintained by preventing charge accumulation on the first fragmented metal line pair (Ko doesn’t use this term, but this is the problem with the prior art discussed in, e.g., paragraph 57, that this design overcomes).
Claim(s) 12-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ko in view of Cai, and further in view of Wei and Biswas, and further in view of Kong et al. (US 2023/0209866)
Regarding claim 12:
Ko, etc., discloses:
wherein the display panel includes a plurality of sub-pixels disposed in the display area, and each of sub-pixel including one or more transistors (e.g., Koo Fig. 1), wherein each of the plurality of sub-pixels includes: a light-emitting element connected to the one or more transistors (Ko Fig. 1: OLED); an encapsulation layer disposed on the light-emitting element (Cai paragraph 120); a plurality of touch electrodes disposed on the encapsulation layer in the display area (Cai paragraph 148).
Ko does not disclose:
“a touch protective film disposed on the plurality of touch electrodes.”
Kong discloses:
a touch protective film disposed on the plurality of touch electrodes (paragraph 84: “protect layer”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to include in Ko, etc., the elements taught by Kong.
The rationale is as follows:
Ko, Cai, Wei, Biswas, and Kong are directed to the same field of art.
Ko barely discusses the touch electrodes. Kong shows in detail how they could be implemented. One of ordinary skill in the art could have included this with predictable results.
Regarding claim 13:
Ko, etc., discloses:
wherein the encapsulation layer includes an insulating organic material (Cai paragraph 121.
Regarding claim 14:
Ko, etc., discloses:
wherein the insulating organic material includes at least one of benzocyclobutene, acrylic resin, epoxy resin, phenol resin, polyamide resin, or polyimide resin (Cai paragraph 83).
Regarding claim 15:
Ko, etc., discloses:
wherein the encapsulation layer includes: a first encapsulation layer disposed on the light-emitting element; a second encapsulation layer disposed on the first encapsulation layer; and a third encapsulation layer disposed on the second encapsulation layer (e.g., Kong paragraph 84, although this is also present in Cai).
Regarding claim 16:
Ko, etc., discloses:
wherein the plurality of touch electrodes include a first touch electrode and a second touch electrode (Kong paragraph 84).
Regarding claim 17:
Ko, etc., discloses:
wherein a touch buffer film is disposed on the encapsulation layer, wherein a first touch connection electrode is disposed on the touch buffer film, wherein a touch insulating film is disposed on the touch buffer film and the first touch connection electrode, wherein the first touch electrode, the second touch electrode, and a second touch connection electrode are disposed on the touch insulating film (Kong paragraph 84), wherein the first touch electrode and the second touch electrode are connected to the first touch connection electrode via two contact holes extending pass through the touch insulating film, respectively (Kong paragraph 86).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 11 is 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
A reason for the indication of allowable subject matter with respect to this claim was given in the Office Action mailed 03 September 2025. Although some of the subject matter of this claim was moved into claim 1, this claim is dependent on claim 1 and therefore unchanged. Those reasons are also unchanged.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 01 December 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Claim 11 was indicated previously as containing allowable subject matter. Applicant moved some of the subject matter of this claim into the independent claim and argued this made all the claims allowable.
But this portion of claim 11, on its own, does not make the independent claims allowable. This is discussed in detail in the rejection above.
With respect to this language, the Examiner had previously considered Ko’s suggestion that the number of lines connected to the second metal line was in and of itself sufficient to meet this part of the language, because if only two adjacent lines are connected this would be met, but now due to the new combination of subject matter Biswas has been added to make it explicitly clear that this could be the case.
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 CHRISTOPHER RAY LAMB whose telephone number is (571)272-5264. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30-5:00 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, Patrick Edouard can be reached at 571-272-7603. 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.
/CHRISTOPHER R LAMB/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2622