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.
Claims 1-30 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 1:
It recites "wherein each of the first clock signal and the second clock signal is to continuously toggle in each of the refresh period and the hold period,
"wherein during the refresh period, the second clock signal applied to the scan driver is applied at a first voltage level and then periodically toggles between the first voltage level and a second voltage level after the second start signal transitions from the first voltage level to the second voltage level."
These two limitations contradict each other.
If something is continuously toggling, it is always toggling. That is meaning of “continuous.” So if it is continuously toggling in the refresh period, it is toggling for the entire refresh period.
But it now claims that it is at a first voltage level until the second start signal transitions, and then it “periodically” toggles. This isn’t continuous.
See applicant’s Fig. 9:
PNG
media_image1.png
421
522
media_image1.png
Greyscale
In this figure there are some clock signals that are continuous in both the refresh and the hold periods (e.g., SC1_GCLK1). The specification also has some signals that do not begin to toggle until a start signal transitions (e.g., SC2_0_GCLK1). So both of these claim limitations are separately described in the specification with respect to separate signals, but they cannot both be the same scan signal.1
Therefore the metes and bounds of the claim cannot be understood, nor can it be compared to the prior art as no art is going to show two contradictory elements.
Regarding claims 2-30:
They are dependent on claim 1.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 16 January 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant amended the claims and argued that the amended claim language is not shown in Park.
Applicant reproduced their Fig. 9 and highlighted the SC2_O section, so presumably this amendment is intended to claim this SC2 clock signal. This clock does not begin until the start signal transitions as shown in Fig. 9.
Applicant argues that Park does not disclose this.
It is difficult to understand what exactly is being claimed here, because the claim also recites “wherein each of the first clock signal and the second clock signal is to continuously toggle in each of the refresh period and the hold period.” The SC2 clock signal of applicant’s Fig. 9 does not do this.
The only clock signals that do continuously toggle are the emission clock and the SC1 clocks. But these clocks do not meet the new claim language. So it’s impossible to tell what part of the specification is being claimed here. The Examiner, because of the “continuously toggle” language, had previously assumed that the signals being claimed were the EM and SC1 clocks. Park was relied upon to show this. Applicant has shifted to claim an SC2 clock, but because the continuously toggle language is still present, this does meet the claim language in its entirety.
Applicant may wish to claim something along the lines of “the second clock signal is to continuously toggle in the refresh period after the second start signal transitions.”
The Examiner agrees that Park does not show a signal that is at one voltage level and then periodically toggles after a start signal is applied. But because the claim language contains contradictory elements it is impossible to determine its patentability overall.
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
1 For this reason 112(a) rejections have not been applied, as this subject matter is shown in the specification.