Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/029,560

DISPLAY SUBSTRATE AND DISPLAY APPARATUS

Non-Final OA §102§112
Filed
Mar 30, 2023
Examiner
WRIGHT, TUCKER J
Art Unit
2891
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
BOE TECHNOLOGY GROUP CO., LTD.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
79%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 7m
To Grant
90%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 79% — above average
79%
Career Allow Rate
718 granted / 908 resolved
+11.1% vs TC avg
Moderate +11% lift
Without
With
+10.8%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 7m
Avg Prosecution
35 currently pending
Career history
943
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.3%
-39.7% vs TC avg
§103
44.7%
+4.7% vs TC avg
§102
35.2%
-4.8% vs TC avg
§112
16.7%
-23.3% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 908 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §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 . Election/Restrictions The 12/23/2025 "Reply" elects with traverse Species G and identifies as reading on claims 1, 14-21, and 24. In the restriction requirement Examiner has set forth why the restriction requirement is proper. Applicant has not provided a basis for why the restriction is improper and refers to claim groupings (“Groups I and II”) that are not found in the 10/29/2025 restriction requirement. Accordingly, the restriction requirement is maintained and Examiner has withdrawn claims 2-3, 5-10, and 12-13 from further consideration as being drawn to a non-elected invention. See, for example, 37 CFR § 1.142(b). Claim Objections Claim 15 is objected to because of the following informalities: “…the first electrode t provided…” should be “…the first electrode 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. Claim 19 is 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 19 recites the limitation "the extension direction." There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. In the interest of compact prosecution, the "the extension direction" will be interpreted as "an extension direction." 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. Claims 1, 14, 19, and 24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by CN107863357A, provided in Applicant’s 9/18/2023 IDS). Regarding claims 1 and 24, in FIGs. 2-11, CN107863357A discloses a display apparatus, comprising a display substrate, comprising: a base substrate (20), comprising a display region (10) and a frame region (11) on at least one side of the display region; a transistor (thin film transistor) on the base substrate, wherein the transistor (TFT, paragraphs [0061]-[0062]) is in the display region, and comprises a gate, a first electrode and an active layer; and a protective structure (21/23) on the base substrate, wherein the protective structure is provided in the frame region and close to the display region, and the protective structure is in the same layer as and is made of the same material as at least one of the active layer, the gate or the first electrode (metal, paragraphs [0061]-[0062]). Regarding claim 14, in FIGs. 2-11, CN107863357A discloses that the frame region surrounds the display region, and a shape of the frame region is a rectangle hollowed out in the display region; and the protective structure is provided around four corners of the display region at four corner positions of the rectangle. Regarding claim 19, in FIGs. 2-11, CN107863357A discloses that a length of the protective structure in an extension direction (e.g. the entire length of 21/23 surrounding the display region in FIG. 2) of the protective structure is greater than or equal to 2 times a width of the display region (entire width of 10) affected by diffraction light. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 15-18 and 20-21 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: Regarding claims 15-18, in FIGs. 2-11, CN107863357A discloses that the protective structure comprises a plurality of second sub-protective structures (either of 21 or 23). However, the prior art failed to disclose or reasonably suggest the claimed display substrate particularly characterized by a distribution density of the second sub-protective structures in a region where the protective structure is located is approximately the same as a distribution density of the active layer, the gate or the first electrode provided in the same layer in the display region. Regarding claims 20-21, in FIGs. 2-11, CN107863357A discloses that the frame region comprises: a first frame region and a second frame region which are provided oppositely, and a third frame region and a fourth frame region which are provided oppositely, the third frame region is connected with the first frame region and the second frame region, and the fourth frame region is connected with the first frame region and the second frame region (the first through fourth frames can be interpreted as arbitrary portions of 11). However, the prior art failed to disclose or reasonably suggest the claimed display substrate particularly characterized by the first frame region comprising a multiplexing circuit, the second frame region comprises a testing circuit, the third frame region comprises a first gate driving circuit, and the fourth frame region comprises a second gate driving circuit; and a width of the protective structure in the direction away from the display region is greater than or equal to the width of the display region affected by the diffraction light, and the orthographic projection of the protective structure on the base substrate does not overlap an orthographic projection of the multiplexing circuit on the base substrate, an orthographic projection of the testing circuit on the base substrate, an orthographic projection of the first gate driving circuit on the base substrate and an orthographic projection of the second gate driving circuit on the base substrate. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TUCKER J WRIGHT whose telephone number is (571)270-3234. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30am-5:00pm. 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, Matthew Landau can be reached at 571-272-1731. 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. /TUCKER J WRIGHT/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2891
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Mar 30, 2023
Application Filed
Jan 09, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12604718
MEMORY DEVICE AND METHOD OF MANUFACTURING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12604544
SOLID-STATE IMAGING ELEMENT
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12598756
PHASE CHANGE MATERIAL (PCM) SWITCH HAVING LOW HEATER RESISTANCE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12588565
SEMICONDUCTOR DEVICE INCLUDING BONDING PADS AND METHOD FOR FABRICATING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12585158
DISPLAY DEVICE HAVING AN OXIDE SEMICONDUCTOR TRANSISTOR
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 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

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
79%
Grant Probability
90%
With Interview (+10.8%)
2y 7m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 908 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