Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/107,478

DISPLAY DEVICE

Non-Final OA §103§112
Filed
Feb 08, 2023
Examiner
SABUR, ALIA
Art Unit
2812
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Samsung Display Co., Ltd.
OA Round
3 (Non-Final)
74%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 5m
To Grant
83%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 74% — above average
74%
Career Allow Rate
424 granted / 571 resolved
+6.3% vs TC avg
Moderate +8% lift
Without
With
+8.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 5m
Avg Prosecution
44 currently pending
Career history
615
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.5%
-38.5% vs TC avg
§103
59.3%
+19.3% vs TC avg
§102
14.7%
-25.3% vs TC avg
§112
18.7%
-21.3% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 571 resolved cases

Office Action

§103 §112
DETAILED ACTION Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a): (a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention. The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112: The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention. Claims 1-5, 7-8, 10-16, and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. Regarding claim 1, the limitation “wherein R1 and R2 of the polysilazane-based compound are attached to the first color conversion layer, the second color conversion layer, and the transmissive layer” is not supported by the original specification and drawings as filed so as to show to the person of ordinary skill that the inventors had possession of the invention at the time it was filed. The specification only states that “R1 and R2 may improve adhesion with other layers” (Spec, p. 23). No further detail is supplied. Therefore there is support for the remaining portion of the limitation: “wherein R1 and R2 … increase adhesion of the insulation layer with the first color conversion layer, the second color conversion layer, and the transmissive layer”. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action. Claims 1-5, 7-8, 10-16, and 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim (U.S. PGPub 2020/0312916) in view of Suematsu (U.S. PGPub 2019/0047258) and further in view of Williams (U.S. PGPub 2015/0188006). Regarding claim 1, Kim teaches a display device (Fig. 2) comprising a display portion including a plurality of pixels (Fig. 2, DA, Pxa, [0045]), a color conversion portion overlapping the display portion, wherein the color conversion portion comprises a first color conversion portion, a second color conversion portion, a transmissive portion, and a light blocking portion (Fig. 6); the first color conversion portion comprises: a first color conversion layer including first semiconductor nanocrystals and a first color filter overlapping the first color conversion layer, the second color conversion portion comprises a second color conversion layer including second semiconductor nanocrystals and a second color filter overlapping the second color conversion layer, the transmissive portion comprises a transmissive layer, the light blocking portion includes a first light blocking member and a second light blocking member (first/second color conversion layers CCP1/CCP2 with quantum dots, [0058]; first/second color filters R/G-CFP, [0079]-[0081]; transmissive portion TP, [0057], light blocking member first/second BM/BP, [0073], [0079]), the color conversion portion further comprises an insulation layer positioned between the first color conversion layer and the first color filter, the insulation layer contacts both the first color conversion layer and the first color filter, the first light blocking member is positioned directly under the insulation layer, and the second light blocking member is positioned directly above the insulating layer (CAP1, [0097], Fig. 6). Kim does not explicitly teach wherein the insulation layer comprises a polysilazane-based compound represented by Chemical Formula 1, wherein R1 and R2 of the polysilazane-based compound in the insulation layer are attached to the first color conversion layer, the second color conversion layer, and the transmissive layer to increase adhesion of the insulation layer with the first color conversion layer, the second color conversion layer, and the transmissive layer. Kim teaches wherein the insulation layer protects the color conversion layers ([0097]), wherein protecting the device comprises protection from moisture ([0053]). Suematsu teaches an insulation layer which prevents moisture from entering an organic electroluminescent device ([0274]), wherein the insulation layer comprises a polysilazane-based compound ([0279]) specifically including a polysiloxazane compound with repeating Si-N and Si-O bonds ([0279]-[0286]), wherein an organopolysilazane compound improves adhesion ([0285]). Williams teaches wherein a protective layer for a light emitting device comprises a polysilazane-based compound represented by Chemical Formula 1 ([0018]-[0019]; x and z may be the same). PNG media_image1.png 122 437 media_image1.png Greyscale Regarding the limitations “R1 and R2 are attached … to increase adhesion”, where the claimed and prior art products are identical or substantially identical in structure or composition, or are produced by identical or substantially identical processes, a prima facie case of either anticipation or obviousness has been established. See MPEP 2112.01. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the time of the effective filing date to combine the teachings of Williams with Lee and Suematsu such that the the insulation layer comprises a polysilazane-based compound represented by Chemical Formula 1, wherein R1 and R2 of the polysilazane-based compound in the insulation layer are attached to the first color conversion layer, the second color conversion layer, and the transmissive layer to increase adhesion of the insulation layer with the first color conversion layer, the second color conversion layer, and the transmissive layer for the purpose of using a moisture barrier layer with a high blocking capability in the device of Kim (Suematsu, [0274]) by utilizing a suitable polysiloxazane compound as taught by Suematsu (Suematsu, [0274]-[0286], Williams, [0015]-[0019]). Regarding claim 2, the combination of Kim, Suematsu, and Williams teaches wherein the insulation layer is continuously disposed across the first color conversion portion, the second color conversion portion, and the transmissive portion (Kim, Fig. 6). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to further combine the teachings of Kim, Suematsu, and Williams for the reasons set forth in the rejection of claim 1. Regarding claim 3, the combination of Kim, Suematsu, and Williams teaches wherein the insulation layer contacts the first color conversion layer, the second color conversion layer, and the transmissive layer (Kim, Fig. 6). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to further combine the teachings of Kim, Suematsu, and Williams for the reasons set forth in the rejection of claim 1. Regarding claim 4, the combination of Kim, Suematsu, and Williams teaches wherein the transmissive portion further comprises a third color filter overlapping the transmissive layer, and the insulation layer contacts the first color filter, the second color filter, and the third color filter (Kim, Fig. 6, B-CFP, [0081]). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to further combine the teachings of Kim, Suematsu, and Williams for the reasons set forth in the rejection of claim 1. Regarding claim 5, the combination of Kim, Suematsu, and Williams teaches wherein the insulation layer is a single layer (Kim, Fig. 6, [0097]). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to further combine the teachings of Kim, Suematsu, and Williams for the reasons set forth in the rejection of claim 1. Regarding claim 7, the combination of Kim, Suematsu, and Williams teaches wherein R1, R2, R3, R4, and R5 may be an alkyl group (Williams, [0019]). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to further combine the teachings of Kim, Suematsu, and Williams for the reasons set forth in the rejection of claim 1. Regarding claim 8, the combination of Kim, Suematsu, and Williams does not explicitly teach wherein, in Chemical Formula 1, a sum of x and z is less than or equal to y. Williams teaches wherein the refractive index of the layer may be adjusted by modifying the ratio of silazane to siloxane in the compound ([0020]). Mere optimization of a result effective variable is prima facie obvious. See MPEP 2144.05IIB. Therefore it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to further combine the teachings of Kim, Suematsu, and Williams such that, in Chemical Formula 1, a sum of x and z is less than or equal to y for the purpose of controlling the optical properties of the insulating layer (Williams, [0020]). Regarding claim 10, the combination of Kim, Suematsu, and Williams teaches wherein the insulation layer is formed through an inkjet process (Suematsu, [0289]). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to further combine the teachings of Kim, Suematsu, and Williams for the reasons set forth in the rejection of claim 1. Regarding claim 11, the combination of Kim, Suematsu, and Williams teaches wherein the insulation layer and has a thickness of 10 nm to 10 um (Suematsu, [0278]). In the case where the claimed ranges overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art a prima facie case of obviousness exists. See MPEP 2144.05. Therefore it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the time of the effective filing date to further combine the teachings of Kim, Suematsu, and Williams such that a thickness of the insulation layer is about 50 nanometers to about 5 micrometers. Regarding claim 12, Kim teaches a display device (Fig. 2) comprising a display portion including a plurality of pixels (Fig. 2, DA, Pxa, [0045]), a color conversion portion overlapping the display portion, wherein the color conversion portion comprises a first color conversion portion, a second color conversion portion, a transmissive portion, and a light blocking portion (Fig. 6); the first color conversion portion comprises: a first color conversion layer including first semiconductor nanocrystals and a first color filter overlapping the first color conversion layer, the second color conversion portion comprises a second color conversion layer including second semiconductor nanocrystals and a second color filter overlapping the second color conversion layer, the transmissive portion comprises a transmissive layer, the light blocking portion includes a first light blocking member and a second light blocking member (first/second color conversion layers CCP1/CCP2 with quantum dots, [0058]; transmissive portion TP, [0057]; first/second/third color filters R/G/B-CFP, [0079]-[0081]; light blocking member first/second BM/BP, [0073], [0079]), the color conversion portion further comprises an insulation layer positioned between the first color conversion layer and the first color filter, the insulation layer contacts both the first color conversion layer and the first color filter, the first light blocking member is positioned directly under the insulation layer, and the second light blocking member is positioned directly above the insulating layer (CAP1, [0097], Fig. 6). Kim does not explicitly teach wherein the insulation layer comprises a polysilazane-based compound represented by Chemical Formula 1, wherein R1 and R2 of the polysilazane-based compound in the insulation layer are attached to the first color conversion layer, the second color conversion layer, and the transmissive layer to increase adhesion of the insulation layer with the first color conversion layer, the second color conversion layer, and the transmissive layer. Kim teaches wherein the insulation layer protects the color conversion layers ([0097]), wherein protecting the device comprises protection from moisture ([0053]). Suematsu teaches an insulation layer which prevents moisture from entering an organic electroluminescent device ([0274]), wherein the insulation layer comprises a polysilazane-based compound ([0279]) specifically including a polysiloxazane compound with repeating Si-N and Si-O bonds ([0279]-[0286]), wherein an organopolysilazane compound improves adhesion ([0285]). Williams teaches wherein a protective layer for a light emitting device comprises a polysilazane-based compound represented by Chemical Formula 1 ([0018]-[0019]; x and z may be the same). PNG media_image1.png 122 437 media_image1.png Greyscale Regarding the limitations “R1 and R2 are attached … to increase adhesion”, where the claimed and prior art products are identical or substantially identical in structure or composition, or are produced by identical or substantially identical processes, a prima facie case of either anticipation or obviousness has been established. See MPEP 2112.01. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the time of the effective filing date to combine the teachings of Williams with Lee and Suematsu such that the the insulation layer comprises a polysilazane-based compound represented by Chemical Formula 1, wherein R1 and R2 of the polysilazane-based compound in the insulation layer are attached to the first color conversion layer, the second color conversion layer, and the transmissive layer to increase adhesion of the insulation layer with the first color conversion layer, the second color conversion layer, and the transmissive layer for the purpose of using a moisture barrier layer with a high blocking capability in the device of Kim (Suematsu, [0274]) by utilizing a suitable polysiloxazane compound as taught by Suematsu (Suematsu, [0274]-[0286], Williams, [0015]-[0019]). Regarding claim 13, the combination of Kim, Suematsu, and Williams teaches wherein the insulation layer is continuously disposed across the first color conversion portion, the second color conversion portion, and the transmissive portion (Kim, Fig. 6). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to further combine the teachings of Kim, Suematsu, and Williams for the reasons set forth in the rejection of claim 12. Regarding claim 14, the combination of Kim, Suematsu, and Williams teaches wherein the insulation layer contacts the first color conversion layer, the second color conversion layer, and the transmissive layer (Kim, Fig. 6). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to further combine the teachings of Kim, Suematsu, and Williams for the reasons set forth in the rejection of claim 12. Regarding claim 15, the combination of Kim, Suematsu, and Williams teaches wherein the insulation layer contacts the first color filter, the second color filter, and the third color filter (Kim, Fig. 6). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to further combine the teachings of Kim, Suematsu, and Williams for the reasons set forth in the rejection of claim 12. Regarding claim 16, the combination of Kim, Suematsu, and Williams teaches wherein the insulation layer is a single layer (Kim, Fig. 6, [0097]). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to further combine the teachings of Kim, Suematsu, and Williams for the reasons set forth in the rejection of claim 12. Regarding claim 18, the combination of Kim, Suematsu, and Williams teaches wherein the insulation layer is formed through an inkjet process (Suematsu, [0289]). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to further combine the teachings of Kim, Suematsu, and Williams for the reasons set forth in the rejection of claim 12. Regarding claim 19, the combination of Kim, Suematsu, and Williams teaches wherein the insulation layer and has a thickness of 10 nm to 10 um (Suematsu, [0278]). In the case where the claimed ranges overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art a prima facie case of obviousness exists. See MPEP 2144.05. Therefore it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the time of the effective filing date to further combine the teachings of Kim, Suematsu, and Williams such that a thickness of the insulation layer is about 50 nanometers to about 5 micrometers. Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim (U.S. PGPub 2020/0312916) in view of Suematsu (U.S. PGPub 2019/0047258) and further in view of Williams (U.S. PGPub 2015/0188006) and Kojima (U.S. PGPub 2019/0288227). Regarding claim 20, the combination of Kim, Suematsu, and Williams does not explicitly teach wherein the moisture permeability of the insulation layer is about 10−3 grams per square meters per day (g/m2/day) or less. Kojima teaches a moisture barrier layer comprising a polysilazane-based compound which has a moisture permeability of 10−3 grams per square meters per day (g/m2/day) or less ([0061]). Therefore it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the time of the effective filing date to combine the teachings of Kojima with Kim, Suematsu, and Williams such that the moisture permeability of the insulation layer is about 10−3 grams per square meters per day (g/m2/day) or less for the purpose of providing an insulation layer which meets the required moisture barrier property for an organic electroluminescent device (Kojima, [0061]). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALIA SABUR whose telephone number is (571)270-7219. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:30-5:30. 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, Christine S. Kim can be reached at 571-272-8458. 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. /ALIA SABUR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2812
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Feb 08, 2023
Application Filed
Jun 13, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §112
Aug 18, 2025
Response Filed
Oct 30, 2025
Final Rejection — §103, §112
Dec 22, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Feb 03, 2026
Request for Continued Examination
Feb 10, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Feb 20, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12604633
DISPLAY APPARATUS AND METHOD OF MANUFACTURING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12598899
DISPLAY DEVICE AND METHOD OF FABRICATING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12593602
DISPLAY PANEL, MANUFACTURING METHOD AND ELECTRONIC DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12588243
SEMICONDUCTOR DEVICE STRUCTURE AND METHODS OF FORMING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12575268
DISPLAY DEVICE AND METHOD OF MANUFACTURING THE SAME
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
74%
Grant Probability
83%
With Interview (+8.4%)
2y 5m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 571 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