Prosecution Insights
Last updated: May 29, 2026
Application No. 18/030,822

HEAD MOUNTED DISPLAY

Final Rejection §103
Filed
May 12, 2023
Priority
Oct 08, 2020 — JP 2020-170671 +1 more
Examiner
BODDIE, WILLIAM
Art Unit
2625
Tech Center
2600 — Communications
Assignee
Dai Nippon Printing Co. Ltd.
OA Round
2 (Final)
26%
Grant Probability
At Risk
3-4
OA Rounds
1y 10m
Est. Remaining
51%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants only 26% of cases
26%
Career Allowance Rate
52 granted / 196 resolved
-35.5% vs TC avg
Strong +24% interview lift
Without
With
+24.3%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
4y 10m
Avg Prosecution
21 currently pending
Career history
224
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.8%
-39.2% vs TC avg
§103
89.1%
+49.1% vs TC avg
§102
5.4%
-34.6% vs TC avg
§112
1.9%
-38.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 196 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . 2. 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. 3. 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. 4. Claim(s) 1-8 and 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Satoh (WO 2018139111) in view of Suzuki (WO 2020066817). Claim 1. Satoh discloses a head mounted display, comprising: a frame; and a display device mounted to the frame, the display device being transparent (Figs. 1-4) and including: a first base substrate (the outermost substrate of the HMD 1, Fig. 1) a wiring board (60, Figs. 2 and 4), a display unit (30, Figs. 2-3) provided between the first base substrate and the wiring board (The transparent antenna 60 is worn when the wearer wears the HMD 1 on the head of the two main surfaces of the image display element 30 (the two surfaces having the largest area among the surfaces of the image display element 30). It is arranged on the outer side opposite to the eyes of the person. For this reason, reception sensitivity can be improved compared with the case where the transparent antenna 60 is arrange | positioned among the two main surfaces of the image display element 30 at the inner surface which becomes a, wearer's eyes side. In addition, when it is assumed that the radio antenna is used in an environment where the radio field intensity is sufficiently secured, the transparent antenna 60 is an inner side surface that is the eye side of the wearer among the two main surfaces of the image display element 30. May be arranged.), and the wiring board including a substrate (63, Fig. 4) having transparency, and a wiring pattern area (64, Fig. 4) arranged on the substrate. Satoh does not, but Suzuki discloses the wiring pattern area including pieces of wiring (Figs. 1-3). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to use Suzuki’s pieces of wiring in the wiring pattern area of Sato to improve the efficiency of the antenna (60). Claim 2. Satoh discloses the display device further includes a second base substrate (65, Fig. 4) provided on the wiring board and, with the first base substrate, sandwiching the wiring board therebetween. Claim 3. Satoh discloses the wiring pattern area and the display unit are shifted in position from each other when viewed in a thickness direction of the substrate (In addition, when the edge of the transparent antenna 60 is difficult to visually recognize, it is not limited to this, and the area of the transparent antenna 60 may be smaller or larger than the image display element 30.) Claim 4. The combined Satoh and Suzuki discloses the wiring pattern area is provided at a position closer to the frame than the display unit is (Suzuki, Fig. 13, wiring pattern area 20 is provided at a position close to a frame). Claim 5. Satoh discloses the wiring pattern area has at least one of a radio-wave transmitting-and-receiving function, a gesture sensing function, a wireless power feeding function, and an anti-fog function (Figs. 5-7). Claim 6. The combined Satoh and Suzuki discloses each as the wiring pattern area, a plurality of wiring pattern areas exists on the substrate, and the wiring pattern areas have functions different from one another (Suzuki, Figs. 1 and 6). Claim 7. The combined Satoh and Suzuki discloses at least a part of the pieces of wiring is arranged irregularly (Suzuki, Figs. 1 and 6). Claim 8. Satoh discloses the substrate includes glass or a resin film (transparent plastic sheet 63, Fig. 4). Claim 10. The combined Satoh and Suzuki discloses the wiring pattern area has a sheet resistance value of 5 ohms per square or less, and a maximum width is 3 um or less when each of the pieces of wiring is viewed at a viewing angle of 120° (Suzuki, paragraphs [0051] and [0055]). 5. Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Satoh in view of Suzuki as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Tsunaichi et al. (JP 2020036031). The combined Satoh and Suzuki does not, but Tsunaichi discloses the wiring board includes a dummy pattern area (paragraphs [0147], [0170], Fig. 19). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to use Tsunaichi’s dummy pattern area in the wiring board of the combined Satoh and Suzuki to improve the function of the wiring board. 6. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DENNIS CHOW whose telephone number is (571)272-7767. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday. 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, Ke Xiao can be reached at (571) 272-7776. 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. /DOON Y CHOW/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2627
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

May 12, 2023
Application Filed
Sep 18, 2025
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §103
Jan 15, 2026
Response Filed
May 26, 2026
Final Rejection mailed — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12636534
TRAMPOLINE WITH SMALL PACKAGE VOLUME
2y 5m to grant Granted May 26, 2026
Patent 12613556
FOLDABLE DISPLAY DEVICE
1y 3m to grant Granted Apr 28, 2026
Patent 12589653
VEHICLE DISPLAY DEVICE
1y 0m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12573336
ELECTRONIC DEVICE WITH BETTER RESOLUTION
1y 4m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12567373
PIXEL CIRCUIT AND DISPLAY DEVICE INCLUDING THE SAME
2y 2m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
26%
Grant Probability
51%
With Interview (+24.3%)
4y 10m (~1y 10m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 196 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance 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