Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 17/761,516

DISPLAY DEVICE USING MICRO LED, AND MANUFACTURING METHOD THEREFOR

Non-Final OA §103§112
Filed
Mar 17, 2022
Examiner
GOODWIN, DAVID J
Art Unit
2817
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
LG Electronics Inc.
OA Round
5 (Non-Final)
67%
Grant Probability
Favorable
5-6
OA Rounds
3y 2m
To Grant
84%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 67% — above average
67%
Career Allow Rate
536 granted / 799 resolved
-0.9% vs TC avg
Strong +17% interview lift
Without
With
+16.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 2m
Avg Prosecution
78 currently pending
Career history
877
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.1%
-39.9% vs TC avg
§103
51.7%
+11.7% vs TC avg
§102
21.5%
-18.5% vs TC avg
§112
24.2%
-15.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 799 resolved cases

Office Action

§103 §112
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 . Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114 A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 12/29/2025 has been entered. Claim Status Previous action: claims 13 through 19 and 21 rejected. Present action: claims 13 through 16, 18, 19 and 21 rejected 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) 13 and 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schubert (US 2017/0288087) in view of Shu (US 9312434) in view of King (US 2004/0222357) Regarding claim 13. Schubert teaches a semiconductor light emitting element assembly comprising: […]; and a semiconductor light emitting element (fig 3d:; [para 0058]) including a first etching layer (fig 3a,3d:315; [para 0063]), […]on the first etching layer (fig 3a,3d:315; [para 0063]), a first conductivity-type semiconductor layer (fig 3a,3d:320; [para 0062]) […], an active layer (fig 3a,3d:325; [para 0063]) on the first conductivity-type semiconductor layer (fig 3a,3d:320; [para 0062]), and a second conductivity-type semiconductor layer (fig 3a,3d:330; [para 0064]) on the active layer (fig 3a,3d:325; [para 0063]), […], wherein a concentration of impurities (fig 3a:n++; [para 0061]) in the first etching layer (fig 3a,3d:315; [para 0063]) is higher than the concentration of impurities (fig 3a:n-; [para 0062]) in the first conductivity-type semiconductor layer (fig 3a,3d:320; [para 0062]) […], and wherein the first etching layer (fig 3a,3d:315; [para 0063]) includes an uneven structure (partially removed porous network ; [para 0033,0034]) […]. Schubert does not teach an etching protection layer Shu teaches a semiconductor light emitting element assembly comprising: a semiconductor light emitting element including a first etching layer (fig 3:2; [column 3 line 2]), an etching protection layer (fig 3:3-1; [column 3 line 13]) on the first etching layer (fig 3:2; [column 3 line 2]), a first conductivity-type semiconductor layer (fig 3:3-2; [column 3 line 12]) on the etching protection layer (fig 3:3-1; [column 3 line 13]), wherein a concentration of impurities (undoped ; [column 3 line 15]) in the etching protection layer (fig 3:3-1; [column 3 line 13]) is lower than a concentration of impurities in the first conductivity-type semiconductor layer (fig 3:3-2; [column 3 line 12]), wherein a concentration of impurities (aluminum) in the first etching layer (fig 3:2; [column 3 line 2]) is higher than the concentration of impurities (undoped) in the etching protection layer (fig 3:3-1; [column 3 line 13]), and wherein the first etching layer (fig 3:2; [column 3 line 2]) is separated from first conductivity-type semiconductor layer (fig 3:3-2; [column 3 line 12]) by the etching protection layer (fig 3:3-1; [column 3 line 13]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide an etching protection layer between the first conductivity type layer and the etching layer in order buffer the first conductivity type layer and thereby avoid damaging the first conductivity type layer which could result in unwanted recombination centers that would reduce the efficiency of the device Schubert does not teach an assembly substrate. King teaches a semiconductor light emitting element assembly comprising: an assembly substrate (fig 2b:10; [para 0015]); and a semiconductor light emitting element (fig 2c:30; [para 0015]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide an assembly substrate so that the devices can be assembled into a large array that integrate with other devices. Regarding claim 21 Schubert in view of Shu in view of King teaches the semiconductor light emitting element assembly of claim 13, further: Shu teaches wherein the semiconductor light emitting element further includes a first conductivity-type electrode (fig 3:8; [column 2 line 59]) directly connected to the first conductivity-type semiconductor layer (fig 3:3-2; [column 2 line 57]), and a second conductivity-type electrode (fig 3:7; [column 2 line 55]) connected to the second conductivity-type semiconductor layer (fig 3:6; [para 0059]), and wherein the first conductivity-type semiconductor layer (fig 3:8; [column 2 line 59]) is disposed between the etching protection layer (fig 3:3-1; [column 2 line 56]) and both of the first conductivity-type electrode (fig 3:8; [column 2 line 59]) and the second conductivity-type electrode (fig 3:7; [column 2 line 59]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide electrodes on the semiconductor layers in order to provide voltage to the diode and thereby energize the device. Claim(s) 14, 15, and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schubert (US 2017/0288087) in view of Shu (US 9312434) in view of King (US 2004/0222357) as applied to claim 13 and further in view of Horng (US 2010/0136728) Regarding claim 14. Schubert in view of Shu in view of King teaches the structure of claim 13 above. Schubert in view of Shu in view of King does not teach prominences in a plurality of bands. Horng teaches the uneven structure (fig 9:235; [para 0047]) is configured such that prominences of the uneven structure extend to form a plurality of bands in a direction from a center of a surface of the uneven structure towards an edge of the surface of the uneven structure (fig 9:235; [para 0047]). PNG media_image1.png 346 464 media_image1.png Greyscale It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the uneven surface to comprise bands of prominences around a center because the etching process of forming a partially removed porous structure will result in high points (prominences) which will be around the center of the surface Regarding claim 15. Horng teaches the semiconductor light emitting element assembly of claim 14, further: an average thickness of the uneven structure (fig 9:235; [para 0047]) is equal to or greater than an effective distance under which dielectrophoresis force acts during a self-assembly process of the semiconductor light emitting element. Dielectrophorisis effective distance is variable depending upon the electric charge used. The limitation must distinguish from the prior art in terms of structure rather than function, In re Schreiber, 128 F.3d 1473, 1477-78, 44 USPQ2d 1429, 1431-32 (Fed. Cir. 1997); See also In re Swinehart, 439 F.2d210, 212-13, 169 USPQ 226, 228-29 (CCPA 1971). Claims directed to apparatus must be distinguished from the prior art in terms of structure rather than function. In re Danly, 263 F. 2d 844, 847, 120 USPQ 528, 531 (CCPA 1959). “Apparatus claims cover what a device is, not what a device does.” Hewlett-Packard Co. v. Bausch & Lomb Inc., 909 F. 2d 1464, 1469, 15 USPQ2d 1525, 1528 (Fed. Cir. 1990). Further, the minimum distance over which dielectrophorisis is effective approaches 0, therefore a thickness greater than 0 (fig 2d) satisfies the claim. Regarding claim 16. Schubert teaches the semiconductor light emitting element assembly of claim 14, wherein the first etching layer (fig 3a,3d:315; [para 0063]) includes a surface having a specific pattern, or a rough surface having irregularities (partially removed porous network ; [para 0033,0034]). Claim(s) 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schubert (US 2017/0288087) in view of Shu (US 9312434) in view of King (US 2004/0222357) Regarding claim 18. Schubert teaches a semiconductor light emitting element assembly comprising: […]; and a semiconductor light emitting element (fig 3d:; [para 0058]) including a first etching layer (fig 3a,3d:315; [para 0063]), […], a first conductivity-type semiconductor layer (fig 3a,3d:320; [para 0062]) […], an active layer (fig 3a,3d:325; [para 0063]) on the first conductivity-type semiconductor layer (fig 3a,3d:320; [para 0062]), and a second conductivity-type semiconductor layer (fig 3a,3d:330; [para 0064]) on the active layer (fig 3a,3d:325; [para 0063]), […], wherein a concentration of impurities in the first etching layer is higher than the concentration of impurities in the first conductivity-type semiconductor layer (fig 3a,3d:320; [para 0062]) […], and wherein the first etching layer (fig 3a,3d:315; [para 0063]) includes an uneven structure (partially removed porous network ; [para 0033,0034]) […], the uneven structure (partially removed porous network ; [para 0033,0034]) including an outermost surface having a specific pattern with protrusions or a rough surface having irregularities (partially removed porous network ; [para 0033,0034]). Schubert does not teach an etching protection layer Shu teaches a semiconductor light emitting element assembly comprising: a semiconductor light emitting element including a first etching layer (fig 3:2; [column 3 line 2]), an etching protection layer (fig 3:3-1; [column 3 line 13]) on the first etching layer (fig 3:2; [column 3 line 2]), a first conductivity-type semiconductor layer (fig 3:3-2; [column 3 line 12]) on the etching protection layer (fig 3:3-1; [column 3 line 13]), wherein a concentration of impurities (undoped) in the etching protection layer (fig 3:3-1; [column 3 line 12]) is lower than a concentration of impurities in the first conductivity-type semiconductor layer (fig 3:3-2; [column 12]), wherein a concentration of impurities (aluminum) in the first etching layer (fig 3:2 column 3 line 2) is higher than the concentration of impurities (undoped) in the etching protection layer (fig 3:3-1; [column 3 line 13]), and wherein the first etching layer (fig 3:2; [column 3 line 2]) is separated from first conductivity-type semiconductor layer (fig 3:3-2; [column 3 line 12]) by the etching protection layer (fig 3:3-1; [column 3 line 13]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide an etching protection layer between the first conductivity type layer and the etching layer in order buffer the first conductivity type layer and thereby avoid damaging the first conductivity type layer which could result in unwanted recombination centers that would reduce the efficiency of the device Schubert does not teach an assembly substrate. King teaches a semiconductor light emitting element assembly comprising: an assembly substrate (fig 2b:10; [para 0015]); and a semiconductor light emitting element (fig 2c:30; [para 0015]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide an assembly substrate so that the devices can be assembled into a large array that integrated with other devices. Claim(s) 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schubert (US 2017/0288087) in view of Shu (US 9312434) in view of King (US 2004/0222357) as applied to claim 18 and further in view of Horng (US 2010/0136728) Regarding claim 19. Schubert in view of Shu in view of King teaches the structure of claim 18 above. Schubert in view of Shu in view of King does not teach prominences in a plurality of bands. Horng teaches a specific pattern (fig 9:235; [para 0047]) forms a plurality of bands in a direction from a center towards an edge of the surface. PNG media_image2.png 368 503 media_image2.png Greyscale It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the uneven surface to comprise bands of prominences around a center because the etching process of forming a partially removed porous structure will result in high points (prominences) which will be around the center of the surface and spread out to the edge. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 13 through 16, 18, 19, and 21 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference combination applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. Newly applied reference combination Schubert (US 2017/0288087) in view of Shu (US 9312434) in view of King (US 2004/0222357) anticipates the claims. Previous rejections under 35 U.S.C. 112(b), first and second paragraph are withdrawn. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DAVID J GOODWIN whose telephone number is (571)272-8451. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 11:00 - 19:00. 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, Kretelia Graham can be reached at (571)272-5055. 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. /D.J.G/Examiner, Art Unit 2817 /Kretelia Graham/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2817 February 18, 2026
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Mar 17, 2022
Application Filed
Aug 15, 2024
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §112
Nov 25, 2024
Response Filed
Dec 11, 2024
Final Rejection — §103, §112
Mar 17, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Mar 19, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Apr 17, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §112
Jul 25, 2025
Response Filed
Sep 20, 2025
Final Rejection — §103, §112
Dec 12, 2025
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Dec 12, 2025
Examiner Interview Summary
Dec 29, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Jan 22, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Feb 04, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12575453
SEMICONDUCTOR DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12550711
INTERCONNECTION FABRIC FOR BURIED POWER DISTRIBUTION
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 10, 2026
Patent 12525557
Die-Beam Alignment for Laser-Assisted Bonding
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 13, 2026
Patent 12500127
METHOD OF FABRICATING SEMICONDUCTOR STRUCTURE
2y 5m to grant Granted Dec 16, 2025
Patent 12494426
TRANSISTOR CAPABLE OF ELECTRICALLY CONTROLLING A THRESHOLD VOLTAGE AND SEMICONDUCTOR DEVICE INCLUDING THE TRANSISTOR
2y 5m to grant Granted Dec 09, 2025
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

5-6
Expected OA Rounds
67%
Grant Probability
84%
With Interview (+16.7%)
3y 2m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 799 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow 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