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 § 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.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 4, 5, 8, 11, 12, 14, 15 and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kim et al. (US 2017/0124972; hereinafter Kim).
Regarding claim 1:
Kim discloses a display device (see Fig. 1) comprising:
a display panel including a display area where a plurality of pixels are arranged (see Fig. 1, display area 110), and a non-display area outside the display area (see Fig. 1, non-display areas 120); a scan driver in the non-display area and including a plurality of stages (see Fig. 1, gate-in panel GIP circuit 170 and paragraph [0144]); and a plurality of clock lines in the non- display area and configured to transmit a clock signal for controlling an operation of the scan driver to the plurality of stages of the scan driver (see Figs. 1 and 6), wherein each of the plurality of clock lines comprises:
a first sub-clock line (see Fig. 6; line 611);
a second sub-clock line which is spaced apart from and arranged in parallel with the first sub-clock line (see Fig. 6; line 621); and
at least one connection part configured to electrically partially connect the first sub-clock line and the second sub-clock line (see Fig. 6; connection line 630; also see paragraph [0106]),
wherein the at least one connection part comprises a plurality of connection parts arranged at different positions along the first sub-clock line and the second sub-clock line (see reproduction of Fig. 6 below; the figure shows two connection parts arranged at different positions along the first-sub clock line and the second sub-clock line).
PNG
media_image1.png
560
379
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2:
Kim discloses the display device according to claim 1, wherein the first sub-clock line and the second sub-clock line have a double-stacked structure (see Fig. 7 and paragraph [0120]- [0121]; the auxiliary clock signal lines 711, 712, 713 and 714 are disposed above the first to fourth clock signals to further reduce the RC delay).
Regarding claim 4:
Kim discloses the display device according to claim 1, wherein the clock lines further comprises a third sub-clock line spaced apart from and arranged in parallel with the second sub- clock line (see Fig. 7; auxiliary clock signal lines 711, 712, 713 and 714 are third sub-clock lines spaced apart from and in parallel with the second sub-clock lines 620).
Regarding claim 5:
Kim discloses the display device according to claim 4, wherein the at least one connection part connects the first, second and third sub-clock lines (see Fig. 7; connections 620, connection holes 631, 632 and 731).
Regarding claim 8:
Kim discloses the display device according to claim 1, wherein the at least one connection part includes a plurality of connection parts, and lengths and widths of the plurality of connection parts are substantially equal to or different from each other (see Fig. 6; there are plurality of connection lines 630 and they have equal length and width).
Regarding claim 11:
Kim discloses an electronic device (see paragraph [0007]) comprising:
a display device (see Fig. 1); and
a processor connected to the display device and configured to control an operation of the display device (see paragraph [0007]; a mobile device or a computer includes a processor), wherein the display device comprises:
a display panel including a display area where a plurality of pixels are arranged (see Fig. 1, display area 110), and a non-display area outside the display area (see Fig. 1, non-display areas 120); a scan driver in the non-display area and including a plurality of stages (see Fig. 1, gate-in panel GIP circuit 170 and paragraph [0144]); and a plurality of clock lines in the non- display area and configured to transmit a clock signal for controlling an operation of the scan driver to the plurality of stages of the scan driver (see Figs. 1 and 6), wherein each of the plurality of clock lines comprises:
a first sub-clock line (see Fig. 6; line 611);
a second sub-clock line which is spaced apart from and arranged in parallel with the first sub-clock line (see Fig. 6; line 621); and
at least one connection part configured to electrically partially connect the first sub-clock line and the second sub-clock line (see Fig. 6; connection line 630; also see paragraph [0106]),
wherein the at least one connection part comprises a plurality of connection parts arranged at different positions along the first sub-clock line and the second sub-clock line (see reproduction of Fig. 6 above in claim 1; the figure shows two connection parts arranged at different positions along the first-sub clock line and the second sub-clock line).
Regarding claims 12, 14, 15 and 18:
Claims 12, 14, 15 and 18 recite similar limitations as in claims 2, 4, 5 and 8. Hence, claims 12, 14, 15 and 18 are rejected under the same reasons as discussed above in claims 2, 4, 5 and 8, respectively.
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.
Claim(s) 3 and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim in view of Park et al. (US 2021/0043717; hereinafter Park).
Regarding claim 3:
Kim discloses all the features in claim 1. However, Kim does not disclose the display device, wherein the plurality of clock lines comprises a carry clock line configured to transmit a carry clock signal, a global clock line configured to transmit a global clock signal, a scan clock line configured to transmit a scan clock signal, and a sensing clock line configured to transmit a sensing clock signal.
In the same field of endeavor, Park discloses a display device, wherein the plurality of clock lines comprises a carry clock line configured to transmit a carry clock signal, a global clock line configured to transmit a global clock signal, a scan clock line configured to transmit a scan clock signal, and a sensing clock line configured to transmit a sensing clock signal (see paragraph [0074]).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to combine the teaching of Kim and Park such that the plurality of clock lines comprises a carry clock line configured to transmit a carry clock signal, a global clock line configured to transmit a global clock signal, a scan clock line configured to transmit a scan clock signal, and a sensing clock line configured to transmit a sensing clock signal. The combination would have yielded a predictable result of improving display quality.
Regarding claim 13:
Claim 13 recites similar limitations as in claim 3. Hence, claim 13 is rejected under the same reasons as discussed above in claim 3.
Claim(s) 9, 10, 19 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim in view of Shin et al. (US 2021/0065642; hereinafter Shin).
Regarding claim 9:
Kim discloses all the features in claim 1. However, Kim does not disclose the display device, wherein the plurality of clock lines are repeatedly connected to a designated number of consecutive stages of the plurality of stages.
In the same field of endeavor, Shin discloses a display device, wherein the plurality of clock lines are repeatedly connected to a designated number of consecutive stages of the plurality
of stages (see Fig. 2; the plurality of clocks are repeatedly connected to every 4 consecutive stages).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to combine the teaching of Kim and Shi such that the plurality of clock lines are repeatedly connected to a designated number of consecutive stages of the plurality of stages. The combination would have yielded a predictable result of improving the reliability of the gate drive, and display quality of the display panel.
Regarding clam 10:
Kim and Shin disclose all the features in claim 9. Kim and Shin do not disclose a length of the at least one connection part is substantially equal to a length of one of the consecutive stages.
However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use any kind of length of the connection part so as to be equal to the length of a stage, where the claimed differences involved to the substitution of interchangeable or replaceable equivalents and the reason for the selection of one equivalent for another was not to solve an existent problem, such substitution has been judicially determined to have been obvious. In re Ruff, 118, USPQ, 343 (CCPA 1958). This supporting is based on a recognition that the claimed difference exist not a result of an attempt by applicant to solve a problem but merely amounts to selection of expedients known to the artisan of ordinary skill as design choices.
Regarding claims 19-20:
Claim 19-20 recite similar limitations as in claims 9-10. Hence, claims 19-20 are rejected under the same reasons as discussed above in claims 9-10, respectively.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6, 7, 16 and 17 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.
Regarding claim 6, none of the references of record alone or in combination discloses or suggests the display device according to claim 4, wherein at least one connection part comprises:
a first connection part configured to connect the first sub-clock line and the second sub- clock line; and a second connection part configured to connect the second sub-clock line and the third sub-clock line.
Regarding claim 7, none of the reference of record alone or in combination discloses or suggests the display device according to claim 4, wherein the at least one connection part comprises: a first connection part configured to connect the first, second, and third sub-clock lines; and a second connection part configured to connect the first sub-clock line and the second sub-clock line or the second sub-clock line and the third sub-clock line.
Claims 16 and 17 recite similar limitations as in claims 6 and 7. Hence, they are objected under the same reasons.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 6/18/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that Kim does not disclose “wherein the at least one connection part comprises a plurality of connection parts arranged at different positions along the first sub-clock line and the second sub-clock line”. However, Examiner respectfully disagrees. As shown in the reproduction of Fig. 6, Kim teaches two connection parts, each connecting at a different position along the first sub-clock line 611 and the second sub-clock line 621. Please note that Kim teaches the first sub-clock line 611 with a break in the middle. However, first sub-clock line 611 should be viewed as one continues line since the label “CLK1” caused the image of the line to appear broken. In addition, Kim teaches “The second connection lines 630… may include at least two lines” (see paragraph [0109]).
As such, Applicant’s argument is not persuasive, and the rejection is maintained.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 LIXI CHOW SIMPSON whose telephone number is (571)272-7571. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 7:00am-3:00pm.
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, William Boddie can be reached at 517-272-0666. 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.
/LIXI C SIMPSON/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2625
Prosecution Insights