Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/105,762

DISPLAY DEVICE

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Feb 03, 2023
Examiner
DINH, TUAN T
Art Unit
2847
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Samsung Display Co., Ltd.
OA Round
3 (Non-Final)
79%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
3y 0m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 79% — above average
79%
Career Allow Rate
916 granted / 1165 resolved
+10.6% vs TC avg
Strong +23% interview lift
Without
With
+23.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 0m
Avg Prosecution
41 currently pending
Career history
1206
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.1%
-39.9% vs TC avg
§103
43.4%
+3.4% vs TC avg
§102
45.0%
+5.0% vs TC avg
§112
6.6%
-33.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1165 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §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 . 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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 12/24/25 has been entered. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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. Claim(s) 1, 3-11, and 13-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a(1) as being anticipated by Kachatryan et al. (U.S. 2018/0122830) cited in the record. As to claims 1, 13, Kachatryan discloses a display device (101, para-0045) is a rollable (para-0005+, claim 13) as shown in figures 1-2 comprising: a display panel (100, para-0047); and a support layer (the bottom of the elements 400, 500) positioned on the display panel, wherein the support layer includes: a metal layer (metal film-400, para-0010, 0052+) positioned below the display panel (100-figure 2); and an elastic layer (500, para-0048+) positioned on opposing surface of the metal layer below the display panel (100), and the metal layer (the bottom 400) below the display panel (100) has an alternate structure in which grooves (400h) are alternately defined on each of the opposing surface thereof. As to claim 3, Kachatryan discloses a thickness of the metal layer (400) is ina range of about 0.5 mm (para-0011, 0052+) to about 2 mm. As to claim 4, Kachatryan discloses the elastic layer (500) fills the grooves (400h) of the metal layer. As to claim 5, Kachatryan discloses an elasticity coefficient of the elastic layer (500) is in a range of about 1 KPa to about 10 GPa, para-0017, 0078+. As to claim 6, Kachatryan discloses the elastic layer includes an elastomer, para- 0012+. As to claim 7, Kachatryan discloses a thickness of the support layer (400, 500) is in a range of about 10 µm to about 10 mm, para-0011+. As to claim 8, Kachatryan discloses a width of each of the grooves is one to ten times a thickness of the metal layer, para-0014+. As to claim 9, Kachatryan discloses a height (depth) of each of the groove is one to ten times a thickness of the metal layer, para-0015+. As to claim 10, Kachatryan discloses a predetermined region (the stretchable region when it rolled) of the metal layer (400) is not covered by the elastic layer, para-0005+. As to claim 11, Kachatryan discloses the support layer (400, 500) further includes a flat metal layer (the portion connection to an adhesive layer 300) positioned between the metal layer and the display panel. As to claim 14, Kachatryan discloses a proceeding direction of each of the grooves (400h) is perpendicular to a rolling direction of the display device (101). As to claim 15, Kachatryan discloses the grooves (400h) are alternately positioned on the opposing surface of the metal layer (400) in a rolling direction of the display device. As to claims 16-19, Kachatryan discloses the groove (400h) has a quadrangular shape (four angles), a triangular shape (three angles), oval shape, or circuit shape with a curved corner in a cross-section, see the grooves in figures 2-3. 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) 2, 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kachatryan in view of Bang et al. (U.S. 2021/0280641). Regarding claim 2, Kachatryan discloses all of the limitations of claimed invention except for the metal layer includes at least one selected from aluminum, titanium, and stainless steel. Bang teaches a display device (1) as shown in figures 1-8 comprising the metal layer (VDL formed of MTL1, para-0162+) includes at least one selected from aluminum, titanium, and stainless steel. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date to have a teaching of Bang employed in the display device of Kachatryan in order to provide a light-weight, high strength, and versatile structure. Regarding claim 12, Kachatryan discloses all of the limitations of claimed invention except for slits defined in the flat metal layer in one direction. Bang teaches a display device (1) as shown in figures 1-8 comprising the metal layer (VDL formed of MTL1, para-0162+) having slits (figure 7) defined in the flat metal layer in one direction. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date to have a teaching of Bang employed in the display device of Kachatryan in order to provide a light-weight, high strength, and versatile structure. Claim(s) 20-21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kachatryan in view of Zhu (U.S. 2021/0319725). As to claim 20, Kachatryan discloses all of the limitations of claimed invention except for a valid thickness of the metal layer for a neutral plane is equal to or less than about 10 % of an actual thickness of the metal layer. Zhu teaches a flexible display (para-0028+) as shown in figures 1-7 comprising a valid thickness of the metal layer for a neutral plane (para-0028+) is equal to or less than about 10% of an actual thickness of the metal layer (6). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date to have a teaching of Bang employed in the display device of Kachatryan in order to provide excellent surface within a multilayer structure where there is no bending stress or strain during folding, acting as a point of zero strain. As to claim 21, Kachatryan as modified by Zhu teaches a neutral plane of the display device is positioned in the display panel (para-0028+). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date to have a teaching of Bang employed in the display device of Kachatryan in order to provide excellent surface within a multilayer structure where there is no bending stress or strain during folding, acting as a point of zero strain. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-21 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. Applicant's arguments filed 12/24/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues: Kachatryan does not disclose “the support layer includes: a metal layer (400, para-positioned below the display panel; and an elastic layer positioned on opposing surfaces of the metal layer below the display panel, and the metal layer below the display panel has an alternate structure in which grooves are alternately defined on each of the opposing surfaces thereof”. After carefully review, examiner respectively disagrees because as in figures 1-2, clearly discloses the support layer (the bottom elements 400, 500) includes: a metal layer (the bottom element 400, para-0010, 0052) positioned below the display panel (100); and an elastic layer (the bottom element 500) positioned on opposing surfaces of the metal layer (400) below the display panel, and the metal layer (400) below the display panel (100) has an alternate structure in which grooves (400h) are alternately defined on each of the opposing surfaces thereof. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TUAN T DINH whose telephone number is (571)272-1929. The examiner can normally be reached MON-FRI: 8AM-4:30PM. 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, Timothy Dole can be reached at 571-272-2229. 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. /TUAN T DINH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2848
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Feb 03, 2023
Application Filed
Mar 16, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103
Jun 09, 2025
Response Filed
Sep 23, 2025
Final Rejection — §102, §103
Nov 14, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Dec 24, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Jan 16, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Feb 13, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12598704
APPARATUS AND METHOD FOR MANUFACTURING POWER MODULE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12581591
POWER REGULATOR INTERFACES FOR INTEGRATED CIRCUITS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12581599
PACKAGING MODULE, ELECTRONIC DEVICE, AND METHODS FOR MANUFACTURING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12581743
ELECTRONIC COMPONENT AND APPARATUS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12571469
CONTROL MODULE OF A VEHICLE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 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
79%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+23.1%)
3y 0m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 1165 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