Prosecution Insights
Last updated: August 17, 2026
Application No. 18/975,585

ELECTRONIC DEVICE

Final Rejection §103
Filed
Dec 10, 2024
Priority
Feb 17, 2023 — CN 202310129295.1 +1 more
Examiner
XIAO, KE
Art Unit
2622
Tech Center
2600 — Communications
Assignee
Innolux Corporation
OA Round
2 (Final)
35%
Grant Probability
At Risk
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 10m
Est. Remaining
63%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants only 35% of cases
35%
Career Allowance Rate
53 granted / 153 resolved
-27.4% vs TC avg
Strong +29% interview lift
Without
With
+28.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
4y 6m
Avg Prosecution
5 currently pending
Career history
164
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
2.3%
-37.7% vs TC avg
§103
60.4%
+20.4% vs TC avg
§102
27.7%
-12.3% vs TC avg
§112
8.4%
-31.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 153 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 § 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, 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. This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention. Claim(s) 1-6, 8-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang et al. Pub. No. US 2018/0239477 A1 [Yang] in view of Hu et al. Patent No. US 10,923,012 B1 [Hu] and US 20170337860 A1 [Yi]. Regarding Claim 1, Yang discloses an electronic device [Figs. 4 & 9, for instance], comprising: a substrate [401], comprising an active area [area including pixels] and a peripheral area [area outside of 401]; an electrical component [element which includes 402, for instance], disposed on the substrate and in the active area [as shown generally]; a first data line [¶ 33], disposed on the substrate and in the active area [403], wherein the first data line is coupled to the electrical component [¶ 33 connecting sub-pixels]; a scanning line, disposed on the substrate and in the active area, wherein the scanning line intersects with the first data line (Yang, Fig. 9 gate transistors within each subpixel 1001, Hu, Fig. 2 G & D lines); a first fan-out line [id. fan-out wires], disposed on the substrate and in the peripheral area [as shown generally]. Yang is silent on a first switch, disposed on the substrate and in the peripheral area, wherein the first switch is coupled between the first data line and the fan-out line; wherein the first switch is controlled to transmit a first signal from the first fan-out line to the first data line during the switch is turned on, and the electrical component is operated in different refreshing frequencies according to the signal. However, Hu teaches a display [Fig. 1] with multiple refresh rate modes [Fig. 3] including a switch [Fig. 14, MUX for instance & also see col. 9, ll. 35-60] in peripheral area [col. 4, ll. 35-45] operating different refresh frequencies [col. 5, ll. 35-55]. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Yang with Hu as required by this claim, since such a modification improves responsiveness while optimizing size constraints. Further Yi teaches wherein switches and muxes may also be used for data lines not just gate lines (Yi, Figs. 1 and 5 MUXes and Demuxes both before the fan out as well as after the fanout). Additionally Yi when combined with the systems of Yang and Hu would necessitate and timings for the data and gate outputs be matched in order to provide proper data to each individual sub-pixel. Regarding Claim 2, Yang in view of Hu and Yi teaches wherein the electrical component is a display unit [Yang ¶ 2]. Regarding Claim 3, Yang in view of Hu and Yi teaches wherein the electrical component is a diode [Hu col. 1, ll. 25-35]. Regarding Claim 4, Yang in view of Hu and Yi teaches wherein the diode is configured to emit a light [Hu col. 1, ll. 25-35]. Regarding Claim 5, Yang in view of Hu and Yi teaches wherein the switch is controlled by a control signal [Yang ¶ 7 where this is a feature in modified invention]. Regarding Claim 6, Yang in view of Hu and Yi teaches wherein the switch comprises a transistor [Hu Fig. 14, MUX]. Regarding Claim 8, Yang in view of Hu and Yi teaches wherein the first signal is a data signal [Yang ¶ 7, Yi, Figs. 1 and 5]. Regarding Claim 9, Yang in view of Hu and Yi is silent on wherein the electrical component displays a corresponding gray-level according to the data signal. However, the examiner takes official notice that it is notoriously old and well known to a person of ordinary skill in the display art to have a data signal correspond to gray-level. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify Yang in view of Hu as required by the claim, since such a modification improves display quality. Regarding Claim 10, Yang in view of Hu and Yi teaches wherein a polarity of the first signal transmitted by the first fan-out line is the same as a polarity of the signal received by the first data line [where this must occur in the modified invention]. Regarding Claim 11, Yang in view of Hu and Yi teaches wherein the switch is included in a multiplexer [Fig. 14, 64]. Regarding Claim 12, Yang in view of Hu and Yi teaches wherein the scanning line extends along a first direction, the first data line extends along a second direction different from the first direction, and the peripheral area is disposed adjacent to the active area along the second direction (Yang, Fig. 4, Hu, Fig. 10, Yi, Figs. 4 and 5). Regarding Claim 13, Yang in view of Hu and Yi teaches further comprising: a second data line (Yi, Fig. 5 Fanouts connected to T1 – T4, D1-D4, T5-T12), disposed on the substrate and in the active area; and a second switch, disposed on the substrate and in the peripheral area, wherein the second switch is coupled between the second data line and the first fan-out line (Yi, Fig. 5 Fanouts connected to T1 – T4, D1-D4, T5-T12). Regarding Claim 12, Yang in view of Hu and Yi teaches wherein the first switch is configured to receive a first control signal, and the second switch is configured to receive a second control signal (Yi, Fig. 5 Fanouts connected to T1 – T4, D1-D4, T5-T12). Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-6, 8-14 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. 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 Ke Xiao whose telephone number is 571-272-7776. The examiner can normally be reached Mon – Fri from 6AM-2PM. 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. 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. /KE XIAO/SPE, Art Unit 2627
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 10, 2024
Application Filed
Oct 08, 2025
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §103
Jan 01, 2026
Response Filed
Jul 31, 2026
Final Rejection mailed — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12693705
PIVOTING WEARABLE RECONFIGURABLE SCREEN
3y 0m to grant Granted Jul 28, 2026
Patent 12664937
DISPLAY PANEL AND DISPLAY APPARATUS
2y 3m to grant Granted Jun 23, 2026
Patent 12664917
DISPLAY DEVICE
1y 7m to grant Granted Jun 23, 2026
Patent 12664949
DUAL-MEMORY DRIVING OF AN ELECTRONIC DISPLAY
1y 6m to grant Granted Jun 23, 2026
Patent 12654104
GAME INTERACTIVE CONTROL METHOD AND APPARATUS, STORAGE MEDIUM AND ELECTRONIC DEVICE
2y 9m to grant Granted Jun 16, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
35%
Grant Probability
63%
With Interview (+28.7%)
4y 6m (~2y 10m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 153 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month