Office Action Predictor
Last updated: April 17, 2026
Application No. 17/856,464

DISPLAY DEVICE AND TILED DISPLAY DEVICE WITH CONTACT HOLE FOR RECEIVING FAN-OUT LINES

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Jul 01, 2022
Examiner
MALSAWMA, LALRINFAMKIM HMAR
Art Unit
2892
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
samsung display Co., Ltd.
OA Round
3 (Non-Final)
90%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 3m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 90% — above average
90%
Career Allow Rate
971 granted / 1076 resolved
+22.2% vs TC avg
Moderate +9% lift
Without
With
+9.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 3m
Avg Prosecution
37 currently pending
Career history
1113
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.7%
-39.3% vs TC avg
§103
39.8%
-0.2% vs TC avg
§102
37.9%
-2.1% vs TC avg
§112
9.4%
-30.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1076 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 . 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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 12/22/2025 has been entered. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 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 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. The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows: 1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art. 2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue. 3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art. 4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness. 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) 1-4 and 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WO 2021/182681 A1, which is a prior art of record (Note: Noh et al., US 2023/0187582 A1, hereinafter, “Noh”, is the US equivalent to WO 2021/182681 A1; accordingly, Noh will be used and referenced as an English language translation in this Office action) in view of Kubota et al. (US 2017/0338246 A1; hereinafter, “Kubota”). Regarding claim 1: Noh discloses a display device comprising: a first substrate 11 (Fig. 7 and [0090]) comprising a first contact hole TH (Fig. 7 and [0158]); ; fan-out lines ES (Figs. 3, 6, 7 and [0083], i.e., note that “ES” is an integral part of a connection between each “PAD2” and each “DL”, wherein each “CL” in Figs. 6-7 must electrically connect through each “ES” in order to further electrically connect to each “DL” in Figs. 3 and 7; therefore, each “ES” is considered to be a fan-out line that corresponds to each “CL” in Fig. 7) disposed in a first metal layer (e.g., opaque metal [0092], i.e., “ES” may be the same material as “BML1” and “BML2”, see [0158]) [on a top surface of the first substrate 11] (see “top surface of first substrate” “Enlarged portion of Fig. 7” below) ; a second substrate 17 (Fig. 7, i.e., layer “17” is considered to be a substrate, e.g., a substrate with respect to the other layers formed above it) disposed on the first metal layer ES and comprising a third contact hole (contact hole for “CNTa” in Fig. 7 and [0083]); connection lines DL (Fig. 7 and [0082]) disposed in a second metal layer (i.e., a material for forming data/connection lines DL) on the second substrate 11 (Fig. 7), the connection lines DL electrically connected to the fan-out lines ES (Fig. 7) through the third contact hole CNTa, respectively; a thin film transistor (e.g., in Fig. 5, either of the two transistors DT_ACT or ST_ACT) disposed in an active layer DT_ACT)/ST_ACT [0092] and a third metal layer (e.g., VL1 or VL2 in Fig. 5 and [0107]) disposed on the second metal layer DL (Fig. 7, i.e., VL1/VL2 is disposed on layer “18”, which is disposed on “DL”); and at least one flexible film COF (Fig. 7 and [0156], wherein a chip-on-film typically comprises a flexible film) disposed on a bottom surface of the first substrate 11, the at least one flexible film COF electrically connected to the fan-out lines ES through the first contact hole TH (Fig. 7), wherein an etching angle (see “angle is 10 degrees or less” in “Enlarged portion of Fig. 7” below) of the first contact hole TH between the top surface of the first substrate 11 (see “top surface of first substrate” in “Enlarged portion of Fig. 7” below) and an inner surface (see “an inner surface of the first contact hole” in “Enlarged potion of Fig. 7 below”) of the first contact hole TH is less than an etching angle (see “angle is 30 degrees or more” in “Enlarged portion of Fig. 7” below) of the third contact hole between the fan-out lines (see “top surface of fan-out line” in “Enlarged portion of Fig. 7” below) and an inner surface of the third contact hole (see “an inner surface of the second contact hole” in “Enlarged potion of Fig. 7 below”). Noh does not disclose an insulating layer on a top surface of the first substrate 11, the insulating layer having a second contact hole connected to the first contact hole TH; and the fan-out lines disposed in a first metal layer on the insulating layer, wherein the second contact hole receives a bottom surface of the fan-out line. Kubota teaches, in a display device with a backside contact similar to that of Noh, an insulating layer 122b (Fig. 1B) is provided on a top surface of a first substrate 110 [0047] such that the insulating layer has a second contact hole (i.e., the contact hole exposing region of “122b” corresponding to “104” in Fig. 1B) connected to a first contact hole (for conductive layer 138d in Fig. 1B); and the conductive layer 138d disposed in a first metal layer [0048] on the insulating layer 122b, wherein the second contact hole receives a bottom surface of conductive layer 138d. Kubota discloses the insulating layer 122b allows the first substrate 110 to be bonded such that the display can be sealed in a closed loop manner [0047]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Noh by incorporating an insulating layer, as taught by Kubota, because the modification could allow the display to be sealed in a closed loop manner. Furthermore, it is noted when Koh is modified by incorporating an insulating layer, as taught by Kubota, all other limitations associated with the insulating layer are also disclosed by Koh (in view of Kubota). Regarding claims 2-4 and 7: re claim 2, Noh further discloses the display device of claim 1, wherein the etching angle of the first contact hole is about 10 degrees or less (see “angle is 10 degrees or less” in “Enlarged portion of Fig. 7” below), and the etching angle of the third contact hole is about 30 degrees or more (see “angle is 30 degrees or more” in “Enlarged portion of Fig. 7” below); re claim 3, Noh further discloses the display device of claim 1, further comprising: a gate driver IC (Fig. 7 and [0156]) disposed on a first flexible film COF (Fig. 7 and [0156]) disposed on an edge of the first substrate 11 (Fig. 7), wherein the first flexible film COF supplies a gate signal received from the gate driver IC to a first connection line among the connection lines DL (i.e., “DL” is a data line) through a first fan-out line among the fan-out lines CL (Fig. 7); re claim 4, Noh further discloses the display device of claim 3, wherein the first connection line (i.e., one data line “DL” in Figs. 5 and 7) is electrically connected to a gate electrode ST_G of the thin film transistor ST_G disposed in the third metal layer VL2 (Fig. 5, i.e., the display shown in Fig. 5 is a microLED display comprising select transistors with gate electrodes, ST_G, and driving transistors with gate electrodes, ST_G; accordingly, the microLED display utilizes an active-matrix driving structure, wherein data lines, DL, typically connect to the gate electrodes, ST-G, of the switching transistors); and re claim 7, Noh further discloses the display device of claim 1, further comprising: a voltage line DT_SD1 (Fig. 5 and [0103]) disposed in the second metal layer (e.g., same layer for “DL” in Fig. 5); and a connection electrode CDP (Fig. 5 and [0107]) disposed in a fourth metal layer on [a side of] the third metal layer (e.g., layer for VL1 or VL2 in Fig. 5 and [0107]), wherein an end of the connection electrode CDP (Fig. 5) is electrically connected to the voltage line DT_SD1, and another end of the connection electrode CDP (Fig. 5) is electrically connected to the thin film transistor DT_ACT. Therefore, Noh (in view of Kubota) renders obvious claims 2-4 and 7. PNG media_image1.png 675 630 media_image1.png Greyscale Allowable Subject Matter Claims 8-12 are allowed. Claims 5 and 6 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. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Claims 5, 6 and 8-12 are allowable for reasons stated in a prior Office action. Remarks Claims 13-20 remain withdrawn from consideration as being drawn to a nonelected invention. Applicant’s remarks have been fully considered, but they are moot in view of the new ground of rejections. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The references listed on the attached PTO-892 disclose display devices with backside contact have some similarity to that of the current invention. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LEX H MALSAWMA whose telephone number is (571)272-1903. The examiner can normally be reached M-F (4-12 Hours, between 5:30AM-10PM). 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, N. Drew Richards can be reached at 571-272-1736. 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. /LEX H MALSAWMA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2892
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jul 01, 2022
Application Filed
Jun 12, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Sep 05, 2025
Response Filed
Sep 22, 2025
Final Rejection — §103
Nov 18, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Dec 22, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Jan 11, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Jan 12, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Apr 08, 2026
Response Filed

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12598877
STRETCHABLE DISPLAY APPARATUS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12593570
DISPLAY SUBSTRATE AND DISPLAY DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12588439
METHOD OF MANUFACTURING SEMICONDUCTOR STRUCTURE WITH SPACER ON PHOTORESIST LAYER
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12581816
Display Substrate and Display Apparatus with Fanout Connection Block
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12581820
DISPLAY SUBSTRATE, MANUFACTURING METHOD AND DISPLAY DEVICE HAVING DISPLAY UNITS ON CONNECTED ISLANDS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
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

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
90%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+9.0%)
2y 3m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 1076 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in for Full Analysis

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

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month