Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/128,363

DISPLAY PANEL AND METHOD OF MANUFACTURING THE SAME

Final Rejection §102§103§112
Filed
Mar 30, 2023
Examiner
TRAN, TAN N
Art Unit
2812
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Samsung Display Co., Ltd.
OA Round
2 (Final)
86%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 3m
To Grant
97%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 86% — above average
86%
Career Allow Rate
941 granted / 1088 resolved
+18.5% vs TC avg
Moderate +10% lift
Without
With
+10.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 3m
Avg Prosecution
45 currently pending
Career history
1133
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.2%
-38.8% vs TC avg
§103
49.9%
+9.9% vs TC avg
§102
34.9%
-5.1% vs TC avg
§112
7.2%
-32.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1088 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103 §112
DETAILED ACTION Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 1. 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. 2. Claims 1 – 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, first paragraph, as based on a disclosure which is not enabling. The disclosure does not enable one of ordinary skill in the art to practice the invention, which is/are critical or essential to the practice of the invention but not included in the claim(s). See In re Mayhew, 527 F.2d 1229, 188 USPQ 356 (CCPA 1976). The specification does not disclose the first insulating layer comprises a first region comprising a first sub-region entirely overlapped with overlapping the first source region and a second sub-region entirely overlapped with a normal region of the first gate and the first source region because connection electrodes CNE1, CNE2, CNE3, CNE4 connected through the first insulating layer (10 or 40 as shown in fig. 4A, or 4B). Therefore, the first insulating layer (10 or 40) comprises a first region comprising a first sub-region (cannot entirely) overlapped with overlapping the first source region and a second sub-region (cannot entirely) overlapped with a normal region of the first gate and the first source region. PNG media_image1.png 597 864 media_image1.png Greyscale PNG media_image2.png 631 612 media_image2.png Greyscale Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 3. 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. 4. Claims 1 – 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as failing to set forth 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. In claim 1, lines 12 - 14, “the first insulating layer comprises a first region comprising a first sub-region entirely overlapped with overlapping the first source region and a second sub-region entirely overlapped with a normal region of the first gate and the first source region” is unclear as to whether it is being referred to “the first insulating layer comprises a first region comprising a first sub-region overlapped with overlapping the first source region and a second sub-region overlapped with a normal region of the first gate and the first source region” because connection electrodes CNE1, CNE2, CNE3, CNE4 connected through the first insulating layer (10 or 40 as shown in fig. 4A, or 4B). In order for further examination, “the first insulating layer comprises a first region comprising a first sub-region entirely overlapped with overlapping the first source region and a second sub-region entirely overlapped with a normal region of the first gate and the first source region” is assumed as “the first insulating layer comprises a first region comprising a first sub-region overlapped with overlapping the first source region and a second sub-region overlapped with a normal region of the first gate and the first source region” In claim 1, lines 18 - 20, “at least a portion of the first sub-region and the second sub-region are disposed adjacent to each other with no first insulating layer having a thickness different from that of the first region” is unclear as to whether it is being referred to “at least portions of the first sub-region and the second sub-region are disposed adjacent to each other with a same thickness in the first region” In claim 1, lines 14 - 16, “a distance from an upper portion of the semiconductor pattern to an upper portion of the gate in the first edge is smaller than a distance from the upper portion of the semiconductor pattern to an upper portion of the gate in the second edge” is unclear as to whether it is being referred to “a distance from an upper portion of the semiconductor pattern to an upper portion of the gate along the first edge is smaller than a distance from the upper portion of the semiconductor pattern to an upper portion of the gate along the second edge” because fig. 4B of Applicant discloses a distance from an upper portion of the semiconductor pattern (AA2) to an upper portion of the gate (GE2) along the first edge (e1) is smaller than a distance from the upper portion of the semiconductor pattern (AA2) to an upper portion of the gate along the second edge (e2). In order for further examination, “a distance from an upper portion of the semiconductor pattern to an upper portion of the gate in the first edge is smaller than a distance from the upper portion of the semiconductor pattern to an upper portion of the gate in the second edge” is assumed as “a distance from an upper portion of the semiconductor pattern to an upper portion of the gate along the first edge is smaller than a distance from the upper portion of the semiconductor pattern to an upper portion of the gate along the second edge” PNG media_image2.png 631 612 media_image2.png Greyscale Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 5. 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. 6. Claim(s) 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Liu et al. (10367073). With regard to claim 19, Liu et al. disclose a display panel (a panel including Fig. 5d; for example, see column 11, lines 4 - 7) comprising: a base layer (101); a light emitting element (a light emitting element including a cathode electrode 900; for example, see column 11, lines 35 - 37) arranged on the base layer (101); a pixel circuit including a first transistor (a first transistor including a semiconductor pattern 300) and electrically connected to the light emitting element; and a first insulating layer (420) arranged on the base layer (101), wherein the first transistor comprises: a first semiconductor pattern (300) arranged between the base layer (101) and the insulating layer (420) and including a first source region (referred to as “300B” by examiner’s annotation shown in fig. 5d below), a first drain region (referred to as “300C” by examiner’s annotation shown in fig. 5d below), and a first channel region (referred to as “300A” by examiner’s annotation shown in fig. 5d below) arranged between the first source region (300B) and the first drain region (300C), and a first gate (500) overlapping the channel region (300A) and arranged on the first insulating layer (420), and wherein the gate (500) comprises a first edge (referred to as “E1” by examiner’s annotation shown in fig. 5d below) disposed adjacent to the source region (300B) and a second edge (referred to as “E2” by examiner’s annotation shown in fig. 5d below) disposed adjacent to the drain region (300C), and wherein a distance (referred to as “D1” by examiner’s annotation shown in fig. 5d below) from an upper portion (referred to as “500A1” by examiner’s annotation shown in fig. 5d below; wherein the upper portion 500A1 is formed on the lower edge surface of a lateral gate portion) of the semiconductor pattern (300) to an upper portion of the gate (500) along the first edge (E1) is smaller than a distance (referred to as “D2” by examiner’s annotation shown in fig. 5d below) from the upper portion (500A1) of the semiconductor pattern (300) to an upper portion (referred to as “500A2” by examiner’s annotation shown in fig. 5d below; wherein the upper portion 500A2 is a top surface of another lateral gate portion) of the gate (500) along the second edge (E2). PNG media_image3.png 505 989 media_image3.png Greyscale PNG media_image4.png 498 979 media_image4.png Greyscale Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 7. 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. 8. Claim(s) 1 – 11, 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jang et al. (11901461) in view of Liu et al. (10367073). With regard to claim 1, Jang et al. disclose a display panel (a panel 210, fig. 11 including Fig. 14) comprising: a light emitting element (710); a pixel circuit including a first transistor (TR2) and electrically connected to the light emitting element (710); and a first insulating layer (140), wherein the first transistor (TR2) comprises: a first semiconductor pattern (A2) arranged under the first insulating layer (140) and including a first source region (referred to as “SR1” by examiner’s annotation shown in fig. 14 below), a first drain region (referred to as “DR1” by examiner’s annotation shown in fig. 14 below), and a first channel region (a region, formed between the source region SR1 and the drain region DR1 and forming under the gate G2, functioning as a first channel region) arranged between the first source region (SR1) and the first drain region (DR1), and a first gate (G2) arranged on the first insulating layer (140) and overlapping the first channel region (the region, formed between the source region SR1 and the drain region DR1 and forming under the gate G2, functioning as the first channel region), and wherein the first insulating layer (140) comprises a first region (a first region including first and second sub-regions 140A1, 140A2 as annotated in fig. 14 below) including a first sub-region (referred to as “140A1” by examiner’s annotation shown in fig. 14 below) overlapped with the first source region (SR1) and a second sub-region (referred to as “140A2” by examiner’s annotation shown in fig. 14 below) overlapped with a normal region (referred to as “G2A1” by examiner’s annotation shown in fig. 14 below) of the first gate (G2) and the first source region (SR1), and a second region (referred to as “140B” by examiner’s annotation shown in fig. 14 below) which overlaps a protruding region (referred to as “G2A2” by examiner’s annotation shown in fig. 14 below) of the first gate (G2), is disposed close to the first drain region (DR1) than the first region (SR1); wherein at least a portion of the first sub-region (140A1) and the second sub-region (140A2) are disposed adjacent to each other with no the first insulating layer (140) having a thickness different from that of the first region (the first region including the first and second sub-regions 140A1, 140A2 as annotated in fig. 14 below). PNG media_image5.png 571 888 media_image5.png Greyscale Jang et al. do not clearly disclose a second region of the first insulating layer, has a thickness greater than that of the first region of the first insulating layer. However, Liu et al. discloses a second region (referred to as “402” by examiner’s annotation shown in fig. 5d below) of the first insulating layer (420), has a thickness greater than that of the first region (referred to as “420A” by examiner’s annotation shown in fig. 5d below) of the first insulating layer (420). PNG media_image6.png 394 577 media_image6.png Greyscale Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the Jang et al.’s device to have a second region of the first insulating layer, has a thickness greater than that of the first region of the first insulating layer as taught by Liu et al. in order to minimize the signal interference for enhancing a stability operation of the semiconductor device, as is known to one of ordinary skill in the art. With regard to claim 2, Jang et al. disclose the first sub-region (140A1) of the first region and the second sub-region (140A2) of the first region have a uniform thickness. PNG media_image5.png 571 888 media_image5.png Greyscale With regard to claim 3, Liu et al. disclose the first insulating layer (420) has a uniform thickness in the second region (402), and wherein the first region (420A as indicated in fig. 5d below) and the second region (402) forms a step in a region overlapping the channel region (300A as indicated in fig. 5d below). PNG media_image7.png 414 633 media_image7.png Greyscale With regard to claim 6, Liu et al. disclose the first insulating layer (420) further comprises a third region (referred to as “420F” by examiner’s annotation shown in fig. 5d below) overlapping the first drain region (300C) and having a smaller thickness than the second region (402), and wherein the second region (402) forms a step with the third region (420F). PNG media_image8.png 405 707 media_image8.png Greyscale With regard to claim 4, Liu et al. disclose the second region (420E) comprises: a first sub-region (referred to as “420C” by examiner’s annotation shown in fig. 5d below) having a first thickness and forming a step with the first region (420A); and a second sub-region (referred to as “420D” by examiner’s annotation shown in fig. 5d below) having a second thickness larger than the first thickness and forming a step with the first sub-region (420C). PNG media_image9.png 529 598 media_image9.png Greyscale With regard to claim 5, Liu et al. disclose the first insulating layer (420) in the second region (420E) has a thickness gradually increasing (increasing from the middle portion of the insulating layer 420 to the region 402) towards the first drain region (300C). With regard to claim 7, Liu et al. disclose a thickness of the first insulating layer (420) in the third region (420F) is the same as the thickness of the first insulating layer (420) in the first region (420A). With regard to claim 8, Figure 5d of the Liu et al. reference (shown below) does appear to show in a cross-sectional view, a length (referred to as “X2” by examiner’s annotation shown in fig. 5d below) of the second region in a channel length direction is at most half of a length (referred to as “X1” by examiner’s annotation shown in fig. 5d below) of the first channel region in the channel length direction, as claimed. However, since the patent drawings are not labeled as “to scale,” one cannot be certain that a length of the second region in a channel length direction is at most half of a length of the first channel region in the channel length direction, as seemingly shown [see MPEP 2125]. PNG media_image10.png 507 781 media_image10.png Greyscale It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the claimed invention to form a length of the second region in a channel length direction is at most half of a length of the first channel region in the channel length direction, because Fig. 5d suggests a length of the second region in a channel length direction is at most half of a length of the first channel region in the channel length direction and a prima facie case of obviousness exists where device dimensions of the prior art are such that one of ordinary skill in the art would have expected them to have the same performance {MPEP 2144.04(IV)(A)}. With regard to claim 9, Figure 5d of the Liu et al. reference (shown below) does appear to show a thickness of the first insulating layer (420) in the second region (402) is at most two times greater than the thickness of the first insulating layer (420) in the first region (420A), as claimed. However, since the patent drawings are not labeled as “to scale,” one cannot be certain that a thickness of the first insulating layer in the second region is at most two times greater than the thickness of the first insulating layer in the first region, as seemingly shown [see MPEP 2125]. PNG media_image7.png 414 633 media_image7.png Greyscale It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the claimed invention to form a thickness of the first insulating layer in the second region is at most two times greater than the thickness of the first insulating layer in the first region, because Fig. 5d suggests a thickness of the first insulating layer in the second region is at most two times greater than the thickness of the first insulating layer in the first region and a prima facie case of obviousness exists where device dimensions of the prior art are such that one of ordinary skill in the art would have expected them to have the same performance {MPEP 2144.04(IV)(A)}. With regard to claim 10, Jang et al. disclose a second transistor (TR1), wherein the second transistor (TR1) comprises: a second semiconductor pattern (A1) arranged on the same layer (A1, A2) as the first semiconductor pattern (A2) and including a second source region (a source region forming under the source electrode S1), a second drain region (a drain region forming under the drain electrode D1), and a second channel region (a middle region of the second semiconductor pattern A1) arranged between the second source region and the second drain region, and a second gate (G1) overlapping the second channel region and arranged on the same layer (G1, G2) as the first gate (G2), and wherein the first semiconductor pattern (A2) and the second semiconductor pattern (A1) include the same material and include any one of polysilicon and oxide semiconductor (the active layer A1, A2 includes a silicon semiconductor layer 130a, and an oxide semiconductor layer 130b which contacts the silicon semiconductor layer 130a). PNG media_image5.png 571 888 media_image5.png Greyscale With regard to claim 12, Jang et al. disclose the first insulating layer (140) has a uniform thickness in a region (referred to as “140B1” by examiner’s annotation shown in fig. 14 below) overlapping the second semiconductor pattern (A1). PNG media_image11.png 561 890 media_image11.png Greyscale With regard to claim 18, Liu et al. disclose a second insulating layer (610) arranged on the first insulating layer (420) and covering the first gate (500); a first connection electrode (710) arranged on the second insulating layer (610) and connected to the first source region (300B as indicated in fig. 5d below) through a first contact hole formed in the first insulating layer (420) and the second insulating layer (610); and a second connection electrode (720) arranged on the second insulating layer (710) and connected to the first drain region (300C as indicated in fig. 5d below) through a second contact hole formed in the first and second insulating layers (420, 610). PNG media_image8.png 405 707 media_image8.png Greyscale 9. Claims 14, 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jang et al. (11901461) in view of Luo et al. (12074174). With regard to claim 14, Jang et al. disclose an upper insulating layer (170) arranged on the first gate (G2); and a second transistor (TR1), wherein the second transistor (TR1) comprises: a second semiconductor pattern (A2) including a second source region (a source region forming under the source electrode S1), a second drain region (a drain region forming under the drain electrode D1), and a second channel region (a middle region of the second semiconductor pattern A1) arranged between the second source region and the second drain region, and a second gate (G2) arranged on (on the bottom) the upper insulating layer (170) and overlapping the second channel region, and wherein the first semiconductor pattern (A2) and the second semiconductor pattern (A1) include any one of polysilicon and oxide semiconductor (the active layer A1, A2 includes a silicon semiconductor layer 130a, and an oxide semiconductor layer 130b which contacts the silicon semiconductor layer 130a), but Jang et al. do not clearly disclose a second semiconductor pattern arranged between the first insulating layer and the upper insulating layer. PNG media_image11.png 561 890 media_image11.png Greyscale However, Luo et al. discloses a second semiconductor pattern (213) arranged between the first insulating layer (300) and the upper insulating layer (400). PNG media_image12.png 405 704 media_image12.png Greyscale Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the Jang et al.’s device to have a second semiconductor pattern arranged between the first insulating layer and the upper insulating layer as taught by Luo et al. in order to improve the electrical performance of the thin-film transistor for enhancing a stability operation of the semiconductor device, as is known to one of ordinary skill in the art. With regard to claim 16, Luo et al. disclose the upper insulating layer (400) has a uniform thickness in a region overlapping the second semiconductor pattern (213). 10. Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jang et al. (11901461) in view of Yang (10895774). With regard to claim 13, Jang et al. do not clearly disclose the first transistor is a switching transistor and the second transistor is a driving transistor. However, Yang discloses the first transistor is a switching transistor and the second transistor is a driving transistor (both the low temperature polysilicon thin film transistor and the oxide thin film transistor can be used as a driving transistor DTFT or a switching transistor STFT; for example, see column 9, lines 7 - 10). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the Jang et al. device to have the first transistor is a switching transistor and the second transistor is a driving transistor as taught by Yang in order to obtain the low-temperature in the transistor for enhancing a stability operation of the semiconductor device, as is known to one of ordinary skill in the art. Response to Arguments 11. Applicant’s arguments filed 01/16/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. It is argued, at pages of the remarks, that “the cited reference does not suggest or teach “a distance from an upper portion of the semiconductor pattern to an upper portion of the gate in the first edge is smaller than a distance from the upper portion of the semiconductor pattern to an upper portion of the gate in the second edge”. However, fig. 5d of Liu et al. does show the gate (500) comprises a first edge (referred to as “E1” by examiner’s annotation shown in fig. 5d below) disposed adjacent to the source region (300B) and a second edge (referred to as “E2” by examiner’s annotation shown in fig. 5d below) disposed adjacent to the drain region (300C), and wherein a distance (referred to as “D1” by examiner’s annotation shown in fig. 5d below) from an upper portion (referred to as “500A1” by examiner’s annotation shown in fig. 5d below; wherein the upper portion 500A1 is formed on the lower edge surface of a lateral gate portion) of the semiconductor pattern (300) to an upper portion of the gate (500) along the first edge (E1) is smaller than a distance (referred to as “D2” by examiner’s annotation shown in fig. 5d below) from the upper portion (500A1) of the semiconductor pattern (300) to an upper portion (referred to as “500A2” by examiner’s annotation shown in fig. 5d below; wherein the upper portion 500A2 is a top surface of another lateral gate portion) of the gate (500) along the second edge (E2). Response to Amendment 12. Applicant's arguments with respect to claims have been considered but are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection. Conclusion 5. Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a). A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any extension fee pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the date of this final action. 3. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TAN N TRAN whose telephone number is (571) 272 - 1923. The examiner can normally be reached on 8:30-5:00PM. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Davienne Monbleau can be reached on (571) 272-1945. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. /TAN N TRAN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2812
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Mar 30, 2023
Application Filed
Oct 15, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103, §112
Jan 16, 2026
Response Filed
Feb 21, 2026
Final Rejection — §102, §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12588286
DISPLAY PANEL AND MANUFACTURING METHOD THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12588290
SEMICONDUCTOR DEVICE AND METHOD FOR MANUFACTURING THE SEMICONDUCTOR DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12550379
Thin Film Transistor Substrate and Display Device Comprising the Same
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 10, 2026
Patent 12550697
Different Isolation Liners for Different Type FinFETs and Associated Isolation Feature Fabrication
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 10, 2026
Patent 12543344
THIN FILM TRANSISTOR AND DISPLAY DEVICE COMPRISING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 03, 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
86%
Grant Probability
97%
With Interview (+10.2%)
2y 3m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 1088 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