Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 18, 2026
Application No. 18/142,208

DISPLAY APPARATUS

Final Rejection §103
Filed
May 02, 2023
Examiner
LEE, ALVIN LYNGHI
Art Unit
2813
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Samsung Display Co., Ltd.
OA Round
2 (Final)
87%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
3y 4m
To Grant
98%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 87% — above average
87%
Career Allow Rate
55 granted / 63 resolved
+19.3% vs TC avg
Moderate +11% lift
Without
With
+10.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 4m
Avg Prosecution
48 currently pending
Career history
111
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§103
52.4%
+12.4% vs TC avg
§102
15.8%
-24.2% vs TC avg
§112
26.1%
-13.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 63 resolved cases

Office Action

§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 . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 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 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. Claims 1-4, 6-7, 9-14, 16-17, and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Baek et. al. (US 20210091161 A1), hereinafter Baek, in view of Kim et. al. (US 20210132424 A1), hereinafter Kim. Regarding claim 1, Baek teaches a display apparatus (Fig 1 display device 1, [0054]) comprising: a substrate (Fig 2 substrate 110, [0059]) including a display area (Fig 1 display area DPA, [0054]) and a peripheral area (Fig 1 non display area NDA, [0054]) outside (Fig 1, [0037]) the display area (Fig 1 display area DPA, [0054]); a display element (Fig 1 pixel PX, [055]) arranged in the display area (Fig 1 display area DPA, [0054]); a transistor (Fig 5 transistor TRR, [0115]) including a semiconductor layer (Fig 5 semiconductor layer 150, [0116]) and a gate electrode (Fig 5 gate electrode GEL, [0121]); and a connection electrode (Fig 5 second region 140A, [0140]) electrically connected ([0140]) to the transistor (Fig 5 transistor TRR, [0115]) and having a multi- layered structure (Fig 5), wherein the connection electrode (Fig 5 second region 140A, [0140]) includes: a main metal layer (Fig 5 main metal layer 141a, [0131]) including a first metal element (Cu, [0131]); and a protective layer (Fig 5 capping layers 142 and 143, [0133]) disposed on the main metal layer (Fig 5 main metal layer 141a, [0131]) and a second metal element (Ti, [0133]) different from the first metal element (Cu, [0131]). Baek fails to teach a protective layer including the first metal element and a second metal element different from the first metal element. However, Kim teaches a protective layer (Fig 2 upper layer UL, [0065] corresponds to Baek: Fig 5 capping layers 142 and 143, [0133]) including the first metal element (Cu, [0066] corresponds to Baek: titanium alloy with Cu, [0065]) and a second metal element (Ti, [0066]) different from the first metal element (Cu, [0066] corresponds to Baek: intermediate layer ML Cu, [0065]). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Baek to incorporate the teachings of Kim by having the protective layer be a titanium alloy. This would reduce the reflectance of light incident on the protective layer ([0068]). Regarding claim 2, Baek as modified in claim 1 teaches the first metal element (Baek: Cu, [0131]) includes at least one of copper (Cu) (Baek: Cu, [0131]), aluminum (AI), platinum (Pt), silver (Ag), gold (Au), and nickel (Ni). Regarding claim 3, Baek as modified in claim 2 teaches the second metal element (Baek: Ti, [0133]) includes at least one of titanium (Ti) (Baek: Ti, [0133]), molybdenum (Mo), and tungsten (W). Regarding claim 4, Baek as modified in claim 3 teaches the protective layer (Baek: Fig 5 capping layer 142, [0133]) includes an alloy of copper (Cu) (Kim: titanium-zinc-copper alloy, [0066]) and titanium (Ti) (Kim: titanium-zinc-copper alloy, [0066]). Regarding claim 6, Baek as modified in claim 1 teaches an auxiliary layer (Baek: Fig 5 base layer 141b, [0130]) disposed under (Baek: Fig 5) the main metal layer (Baek: Fig 5 main metal layer 141a, [0131]). Regarding claim 7, Baek as modified in claim 6 teaches the auxiliary layer (Baek: Fig 5 base layer 141b, [0130]) includes the second metal element (Baek: titanium, [0130]). Regarding claim 9, Baek as modified in claim 7 fails to teach the auxiliary layer further includes the first metal element. However, Kim teaches the auxiliary layer (Fig 2 lower layer LL, [0065] corresponds to Baek: Fig 5 base layer 141b, [0130]) further includes the first metal element (lower layer LL may include a titanium alloy, [0065]; the titanium alloy may include titanium-zinc-copper alloy, [0066]). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Baek to incorporate the teachings of Kim by having the auxiliary layer also having the first metal layer. This would be a different type of adhesion layer ([0068]). Regarding claim 10, Baek as modified in claim 1 teaches the semiconductor layer (Fig 5 semiconductor layer 150, [0116]) is disposed on the substrate (Fig 5 substrate 110, [0059]), the gate electrode (Fig 5 gate electrode GEL, [0121]) is disposed on a gate insulating layer (Fig 5 gate insulating film 162, [0116]; figure does not point directly to transistor gate insulating layer) disposed on the semiconductor layer (Fig 5 semiconductor layer 150, [0116]), and the connection electrode (Fig 5 second region 140A, [0140]) is electrically connected (Fig 5) to the semiconductor layer (Fig 5 semiconductor layer 150, [0116]). Regarding claim 11, Baek teaches a display apparatus (Fig 1 display device 1, [0054]) comprising: a substrate (Fig 2 substrate 110, [0059]) including a display area (Fig 1 display area DPA, [0054]) and a peripheral area (Fig 1 non display area NDA, [0054]) outside (Fig 1, [0037]) the display area (Fig 1 display area DPA, [0054]); a display element (Fig 1 pixel PX, [055]) arranged in the display area (Fig 1 display area DPA, [0054]); a transistor (Fig 5 transistor TRR, [0115]) including a semiconductor layer (Fig 5 semiconductor layer 150, [0116]) and a gate electrode (Fig 5 gate electrode GEL, [0121]); and a connection electrode (Fig 5 second region 140A, [0140]) electrically connected ([0140]) to the transistor (Fig 5 transistor TRR, [0115]) and having a multi- layered structure (Fig 5), wherein the connection electrode (Fig 5 second region 140A, [0140]) includes: a main metal layer (Fig 5 main metal layer 141a, [0131]) including a first metal element (Cu, [0131]); and a first protective layer (Fig 5 capping layer 143, [0133]) disposed over the main metal layer (Fig 5 main metal layer 141a, [0131]) and including the first metal element (Cu, [0134]); and a second protective layer (Fig 5 capping layer 142, [0133]) disposed between the main metal layer (Fig 5 main metal layer 141a, [0131]) and the first protective layer (Fig 5 capping layer 143, [0133]) and including a second metal element (Ti, [0133]). Baek fails to teach a first protective layer a second metal element different from the first metal element. However, Kim teaches a protective layer (Fig 2 upper layer UL, [0065] corresponds to Baek: Fig 5 capping layer 143, [0133]) including a second metal element (Ti, [0066]) different from the first metal element (Cu, [0066] corresponds to Baek: intermediate layer ML Cu, [0065]). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Baek to incorporate the teachings of Kim by having the protective layer be a titanium alloy. This would reduce the reflectance of light incident on the protective layer ([0068]). Regarding claim 12, Baek as modified in claim 11 teaches the first metal element (Baek: Cu, [0131]) includes at least one of copper (Cu) (Baek: Cu, [0131]), aluminum (Al), platinum (Pt), silver (Ag), gold (Au), and nickel (Ni). Regarding claim 13, Baek as modified in claim 12 teaches the second metal element (Baek: Ti, [0133]) includes at least one of titanium (Ti) (Baek: Ti, [0133]), molybdenum (Mo), and tungsten (W). Regarding claim 14, Baek as modified in claim 13 teaches the first protective layer (Baek: Fig 5 capping layer 142, [0133]) includes an alloy of copper (Cu) (Kim: titanium-zinc-copper alloy, [0066]) and titanium (Ti) (Kim: titanium-zinc-copper alloy, [0066]). Regarding claim 16, Baek as modified in claim 11 teaches an (Baek: Fig 5 base layer 141b, [0130]) disposed under (Baek: Fig 5) the main metal layer (Baek: Fig 5 main metal layer 141a, [0131]). Regarding claim 17, Baek as modified in claim 16 teaches the auxiliary layer (Baek: Fig 5 base layer 141b, [0130]) includes the second metal element (Baek: titanium, [0130]). Regarding claim 19, Baek as modified in claim 17 fails to teach the auxiliary layer further includes the first metal element. However, Kim teaches the auxiliary layer (Fig 2 lower layer LL, [0065] corresponds to Baek: Fig 5 base layer 141b, [0130]) further includes the first metal element (lower layer LL may include a titanium alloy, [0065]; the titanium alloy may include titanium-zinc-copper alloy, [0066]). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Baek to incorporate the teachings of Kim by having the auxiliary layer also having the first metal layer. This would be a different type of adhesion layer ([0068]). Regarding claim 20, Baek as modified in claim 11 teaches the semiconductor layer (Fig 5 semiconductor layer 150, [0116]) is disposed on the substrate (Fig 5 substrate 110, [0059]), the gate electrode (Fig 5 gate electrode GEL, [0121]) is disposed on a gate insulating layer (Fig 5 gate insulating film 162, [0116]; figure does not point directly to transistor gate insulating layer) disposed on the semiconductor layer (Fig 5 semiconductor layer 150, [0116]), and the connection electrode (Fig 5 second region 140A, [0140]) is electrically connected (Fig 5) to the semiconductor layer (Fig 5 semiconductor layer 150, [0116]). Claims 5 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Baek et. al. (US 20210091161 A1), hereinafter Baek, in view of Kim et. al. (US 20210132424 A1), hereinafter Kim, in further view of Baek et. al. (US 20200395428 A1), hereinafter Baek2. Regarding claim 5, Baek as modified in claim 1 fails to teach an oxide metal layer disposed on the protective layer and including a metal oxide including the first metal element and the second metal element. Baek2 teaches an oxide layer may be formed when the upper portion a multilayer pad is exposed to atmosphere during production. The metal oxide includes the same metal element as that of the upper portion of the pad structure. One having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would recognize that the modified protective layer of Baek and Kim would form an oxide when exposed to atmosphere during production. The metal oxide layer would have a metal oxide of the first and second metal element. MPEP 2143(I)(G) Regarding claim 15, Baek as modified in claim 11 fails to teach an oxide metal layer disposed on the first protective layer and including a metal oxide including the first metal element and the second metal element. Baek2 teaches an oxide layer may be formed when the upper portion a multilayer pad is exposed to atmosphere during production. The metal oxide includes the same metal element as that of the upper portion of the pad structure. One having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would recognize that the modified protective layer of Baek and Kim would form an oxide when exposed to atmosphere during production. The metal oxide layer would have a metal oxide of the first and second metal element. MPEP 2143(I)(G) Claims 8 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Baek et. al. (US 20210091161 A1), hereinafter Baek, in view of Kim et. al. (US 20210132424 A1), hereinafter Kim, in further view of Chung (US 20170352689 A1). Regarding claim 8, Baek as modified in claim 7 fails to teach the auxiliary layer includes an auxiliary layer tip further protruding in a lateral direction than the main metal layer at a border between the auxiliary layer and the main metal layer. However, Chung teaches an auxiliary layer (Fig 1 first layer 105b, [0031] corresponds to Baek: Fig 5 base layer 141b, [0130]) includes an auxiliary layer tip (Fig 1 distance Y, [0031]) further protruding in a lateral direction (Fig 1 distance Y, [0031]) than the main metal layer (Fig 1 second layer 106b, [0031] corresponds to Baek: Fig 5 main metal layer 141a, [0131]) at a border between the auxiliary layer (Fig 1 first layer 105b, [0031] corresponds to Baek: Fig 5 base layer 141b, [0130]) and the main metal layer (Fig 1 second layer 106b, [0031] corresponds to Baek: Fig 5 main metal layer 141a, [0131]). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Baek and Kim to incorporate the teachings of Chung by having tips on the auxiliary layer. This would aid in reducing the diffusion of metal atoms in the main metal layer into the layers underneath the auxiliary layer ([0040]). MPEP 2143(I)(G) Regarding claim 18, Baek as modified in claim 17 fails to teach the auxiliary layer includes an auxiliary layer tip further protruding in a lateral direction than the main metal layer at a border between the auxiliary layer and the main metal layer. However, Chung teaches an auxiliary layer (Fig 1 first layer 105b, [0031] corresponds to Baek: Fig 5 base layer 141b, [0130]) includes an auxiliary layer tip (Fig 1 distance Y, [0031]) further protruding in a lateral direction (Fig 1 distance Y, [0031]) than the main metal layer (Fig 1 second layer 106b, [0031] corresponds to Baek: Fig 5 main metal layer 141a, [0131]) at a border between the auxiliary layer (Fig 1 first layer 105b, [0031] corresponds to Baek: Fig 5 base layer 141b, [0130]) and the main metal layer (Fig 1 second layer 106b, [0031] corresponds to Baek: Fig 5 main metal layer 141a, [0131]). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Baek and Kim to incorporate the teachings of Chung by having tips on the auxiliary layer. This would aid in reducing the diffusion of metal atoms in the main metal layer into the layers underneath the auxiliary layer ([0040]). MPEP 2143(I)(G) Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments, see 35 USC §103 section starting on page 7, filed January 30, 2026, with respect to the 35 USC §103 rejection of claim 1, have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. As submitted by Applicant, Baek teaches material selection to prevent or reduce the formation of tips during processing. However, Kim acknowledges tips forming during etching and teaches a method to reduce or remove the tips that form during processing ([0101]-[0109]). One having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would use the method of Kim in to overcome the tip formation, as both methods happen during the etch step of the electrode formation and are known by those in the art. This would allow the usage of a titanium-zinc-copper alloy with the advantage of reducing the reflectance of incident light, as taught by Kim, in the structure of Baek. Applicant has not provided arguments regarding independent claim 11. However, arguments for additional dependent claims 15 and 18, starting on page 8, filed January 30, 2026, refer to the Baek-Kim combination for claim 1. Thus, for reasons similar to claim 1, the rejection for claim 11 stands. Conclusion THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) 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 mailing date of this final action. The Examiner has pointed out particular references contained in the prior art of record within the body of this action for the convenience of the Applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings in the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALVIN L LEE whose telephone number is (703)756-1921. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:30 am - 5 pm (ET). 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, STEVEN GAUTHIER can be reached at (571)270-0373. 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. /ALVIN L LEE/Examiner, Art Unit 2813 /STEVEN B GAUTHIER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2813
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

May 02, 2023
Application Filed
Oct 28, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Jan 30, 2026
Response Filed
Mar 23, 2026
Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12604620
DISPLAY DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12588283
SEMICONDUCTOR STRUCTURE AND RELATED METHODS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12563931
DISPLAY PANEL
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 12520598
Novel Protection Diode Structure For Stacked Image Sensor Devices
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 06, 2026
Patent 12520663
TRANSPARENT DISPLAY APPARATUS
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 06, 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
87%
Grant Probability
98%
With Interview (+10.7%)
3y 4m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 63 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