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 .
Status of Claims
The amendment filed on 6/3/2026 has been entered. In the amendment, Applicant amended claims 1-4, 7, 11, 15-20, cancelled claims 13-14 and added new claims 21-22. Currently claims 1-12 and 15-22 are pending.
Claim Objections
Claims 1, 4, 7 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 1, the limitations
“each of the plurality of pixel circuits comprises a driving circuit and a data writing circuit;
the data writing circuit is configured to provide a data signal to a first terminal of the driving circuit”
is suggested changed to
“each of the plurality of pixel circuits comprises a driving circuit and a data writing circuit, the data writing circuit being configured to provide a data signal to a first terminal of the driving circuit;
to definitely indicates how the data writing circuit and the driving circuit in each pixel circuit operate collectively.
Claims 4, 7 each is suggested for making the same amendment as claim 1.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 1-12 and 15-20 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 element “the light-emitting element” (emphasis added) in ll. 3 from the bottom of page 7 and in ll. 5-6 from the top of page 8. It is unclear what is referred to by “the light-emitting element”. It is noted that the instant claim recites “A display panel comprising … a plurality of light-emitting elements” and “the plurality of light-emitting elements comprises at least one first light-emitting element and at least one second light-emitting element”. The current claim language merely indicates that at least two light-emitting elements are present in the display panel, but does not specify how the at least two light-emitting elements are related to each pixel. It is impossible to derive what is “the light-emitting element”.
Claims 2-3 and 15-20 are rejected because they depend on claim 1.
Claim 2 is further rejected because it recites “the driving circuit” but fail to specify whether or not “the driving circuit” is associated with a certain pixel or each pixel.
Claim 4 recites the feature “the plurality of light-emitting elements comprise at least one first light-emitting element and at least one second light-emitting element” and the feature “wherein the plurality of light-emitting elements further comprises a third light-emitting element, and the first light-emitting element, the second light-emitting element, and the third light-emitting element have different light-emitting colors” (emphasis added). In view of the latter feature, it appears that only one first light-emitting element and only one second light-emitting element are in the plurality of plurality of light-emitting elements, making it unclear why reciting “at least one first light-emitting element” and “at least one second light-emitting element” in the former feature in the current claim language. Furthermore, it is unclear how “the driving circuit” recited in ll. 5 from the bottom is related to “the plurality of pixel circuits”(e.g., one of the plurality of pixel circuits or each of the plurality of pixel circuits).
Claims 5-6 and 21 are rejected because they depend on claim 4.
Claim 7 recites the feature “the plurality of light-emitting elements comprise at least one first light-emitting element and at least one second light-emitting element” and the features “in the first mode, when the display panel displays the black state image, a data signal corresponding to the first light-emitting element is black state voltage G014, and a data signal corresponding to the second light-emitting element is black state voltage G015; in the second mode, when the display panel displays the black state image, a data signal corresponding to the first light-emitting element is black state voltage G02.4, and a data signal corresponding to the second light-emitting element is black state voltage G022” (emphasis added). In view of the latter features, it appears that only one first light-emitting element and only one second light-emitting element are in the plurality of plurality of light-emitting elements, making it unclear why reciting “at least one first light-emitting element” and “at least one second light-emitting element” in the former feature in the current claim language.
Claims 8-12 and 22 are rejected because they depend on claim 7.
Claim 20 is further rejected because it recites “the driving circuit” but fail to specify whether “the driving circuit” is associated with a certain pixel or each pixel.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-12 and 15-22 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
Drawing objections set forth in previous Office action are withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1, 4 and 7 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 XUEMEI ZHENG whose telephone number is (571)272-1434. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday: 9:30 pm-6:00 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, Benjamin Lee can be reached at 571-272-2963. 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.
/XUEMEI ZHENG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2629
Prosecution Insights