Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 17/960,531

NANOROD LIGHT-EMITTING DIODE, DISPLAY APPARATUS INCLUDING THE NANOROD LIGHT-EMITTING DIODE, AND METHOD OF MANUFACTURING THE NANOROD LIGHT-EMITTING DIODE

Non-Final OA §102§103§112
Filed
Oct 05, 2022
Examiner
HSIEH, HSIN YI
Art Unit
2899
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.
OA Round
2 (Non-Final)
51%
Grant Probability
Moderate
2-3
OA Rounds
3y 10m
To Grant
57%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 51% of resolved cases
51%
Career Allow Rate
321 granted / 631 resolved
-17.1% vs TC avg
Moderate +6% lift
Without
With
+6.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 10m
Avg Prosecution
57 currently pending
Career history
688
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§103
39.3%
-0.7% vs TC avg
§102
23.1%
-16.9% vs TC avg
§112
35.3%
-4.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 631 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103 §112
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. (a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claim(s) 1 and 3-5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/(a)(2) as being anticipated by Chun et al. (US 2016/0013365 A1). Regarding claim 1, Chun et al. teaches a nanorod light-emitting diode (100; Fig. 1, [0059]) comprising: a first conductivity-type semiconductor layer (142A; Fig. 1, [0075]) including a body portion (the body portion B of 142A; Fig. 2D, [0091]) and a top portion (the tip portion T of 142A; Fig. 2D, [0091]) provided on the body portion (the body portion B of 142A), the body portion (the body portion B of 142A) having a cylindrical shape ([0091]), and the top portion (the tip portion T of 142A) having a hexagonal pyramid shape ([0091]); an active layer (144; Fig. 1, [0059]) covering an upper surface of the top portion (the tip portion T of 142A; see Fig. 2H); a second conductivity-type semiconductor layer (146; Fig. 1, [0059]) covering an upper surface of the active layer (144; see Fig. 2H); an electrode layer (150; Fig. 1, [0059]) covering an upper surface of the second conductivity-type semiconductor layer (146; see Fig. 2I); and an insulating layer (160 of silicon dioxide; Fig. 1, [0079]) provided on a side surface (the left or right side surface) of the body portion (the body portion B of 142A) to cover a first region of the side surface of the body portion (an upper region of the left or right side surface of the body portion B of 142A; see Figs 2D and 2I) and not cover a second region of the side surface of the body portion (an lower portion of the left or right side surface of the body portion B of 142A covered by 130; see Figs 2D and 2I), the second region (an lower portion of the left or right side surface of the body portion B of 142A covered by 130) being lower than the first region (an upper region of the left or right side surface of the body portion B of 142A). Regarding claim 3, Chun et al. teaches the nanorod light-emitting diode of claim 1, wherein a height of the body portion (H1 + H2; [0073]) is about 2 µm to about 7 µm (from 2.8 µm to 4.6 µm; [0073]). Regarding claim 4, Chun et al. teaches the nanorod light-emitting diode of claim 1, wherein a diameter of the body portion (the width of the body portion B of 142A; [0159]) is about 50 nm to about 1000 nm (340 nm to 380 nm; [0159]). Regarding claim 5, Chun et al. teaches the nanorod light-emitting diode of claim 1, wherein a first diameter of the body portion (the biggest diameter of the body portion B of 142A) at the first region (an upper region of the left or right side surface of the body portion B of 142A) is greater than a second diameter of the body portion (the smallest diameter of the body portion B of 142A) at the second region (an lower portion of the left or right side surface of the body portion B of 142A covered by 130; see Fig. 2D; [0099]). 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. 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. Claim(s) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chun et al. as applied to claim 1 above. Regarding claim 2, Chun et al. teaches the nanorod light-emitting diode of claim 1, wherein a height of the second region of the side surface of the body portion (a height of an lower portion of the left or right side surface of the body portion B of 142A covered by 130, i.e. the thickness of the mask layer 130; see Fig. 2D). Chun et al. does not teach a height of the second region of the side surface of the body portion is about 20 nm to about 100 nm. (emphasis added) Parameters such as a height of the second region of the side surface of the body portion, i.e. the thickness of the mask layer 130, in the art of semiconductor manufacturing process are subject to routine experimentation and optimization to achieve the intended height of the light emitting nanostructures during device fabrication ([0089]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to incorporate a height of the second region of the side surface of the body portion, i.e. the thickness of the mask layer 130, within the range as claimed in order to achieve the intended height of the light emitting nanostructures ([0089]). Allowable Subject Matter Claim 6 is 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: The prior art of record does not teach or suggest, singularly or in combination, at least the limitations of "wherein the insulating layer is in direct contact with the body portion at the first region" as recited in claim 6. Response to Arguments Applicant’s amendments, filed 11/28/2025, overcome the rejections to claims 1-6 under 35 U.S.C. 112. The rejections to claims 1-6 under 35 U.S.C. 112 have been withdrawn. Applicant's arguments with respect to claim 1 have been considered but are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HSIN YI HSIEH whose telephone number is (571)270-3043. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30 - 5:00 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, Zandra V Smith can be reached on 571-272-2429. 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. /HSIN YI HSIEH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2899 3/25/2026
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Oct 05, 2022
Application Filed
Nov 22, 2022
Response after Non-Final Action
Sep 30, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103, §112
Nov 28, 2025
Response Filed
Mar 25, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12598786
FIELD EFFECT TRANSISTOR STRUCTURES
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12575243
DISPLAY DEVICE AND METHOD OF MANUFACTURING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12550486
OPTOELECTRONIC DEVICE WITH AXIAL THREE-DIMENSIONAL LIGHT-EMITTING DIODES
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 10, 2026
Patent 12538616
LIGHT EMITTING DIODE WITH OPTIMISED ELECTRIC INJECTION FROM A SIDE ELECTRODE
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 27, 2026
Patent 12538617
3D LIGHT-EMITTING DIODE AND ASSOCIATED MANUFACTURING METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 27, 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

2-3
Expected OA Rounds
51%
Grant Probability
57%
With Interview (+6.2%)
3y 10m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 631 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