Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/164,615

DISPLAY DEVICE AND MANUFACTURING METHOD THEREOF

Final Rejection §103
Filed
Feb 06, 2023
Examiner
JONES, ERIC W
Art Unit
2892
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Magnolia White Corporation
OA Round
2 (Final)
61%
Grant Probability
Moderate
3-4
OA Rounds
3y 3m
To Grant
79%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 61% of resolved cases
61%
Career Allow Rate
418 granted / 685 resolved
-7.0% vs TC avg
Strong +18% interview lift
Without
With
+17.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 3m
Avg Prosecution
33 currently pending
Career history
718
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.1%
-39.9% vs TC avg
§103
60.8%
+20.8% vs TC avg
§102
25.8%
-14.2% vs TC avg
§112
10.3%
-29.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 685 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 . Priority Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55. Specification The new title submitted 2/3/2026 is acknowledged and accepted by the Office. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments, see pages 6-9, filed 2/3/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Choung (of record) in view Zhao (of record) and Choung 417 (of record). Response to Amendment/Claims Status Claims 1 and 3 have been amended. Claims 4-5, 7 and 13-18 have been canceled. Claims 1-3, 6 and 8-12 are currently pending and being examined. 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. This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention. Claims 1-3, 6 and 8-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CHOUNG et al (US 2022/0077251 A1-of record, hereafter Choung) in view of ZHAO et al (US 2024/0215318 A1-of record, hereafter Zhao) and CHOUNG et al (US 2022/0344417 A1-of record, hereafter Choung 417). Re claim 1, Choung discloses in FIGS. 1-2 a display device comprising: a lower electrode (104; [0027]); a rib (126; [0028]) which covers part (left/right edges) of the lower electrode (104) and comprises an aperture (unlabeled opening to expose 104; [0028]) overlapping (covering) the lower electrode (104); a partition (110; [0030]) provided on the rib (126); an upper electrode (114; [0032]) which faces the lower electrode (104) and is in contact with (FIG. 2; [0032]) the partition (110); an organic layer (112; [0029]) located between the lower electrode (104) and the upper electrode (114) and emitting light (R, G, B or W; [0029]) based on a potential difference (energized for basic OLED operation; [0029]) between the lower electrode (104) and the upper electrode (114); and a sealing layer (SiN 116; [0034]) located on the upper electrode (114), wherein the partition (110) comprises a lower portion (110A) provided on the rib (126), and an upper portion (oxide of silicon 110B; [0028] and [0030]-[0031]) provided on the lower portion (110A) and comprising an end portion (206; [0041]) protruding (extending; [0041]) from a side surface (111; [0041]) of the lower portion (110A), and the upper portion (110B) is formed of a material (oxide of silicon e.g. SiO2; [0028] and [0030]-[0031]) which has translucency (transmission of light) and which is different from (not the same as) a material (SiN) of the sealing layer (116). A. Choung fails to disclose the upper portion (110B) includes: a first layer; and a second layer covering the first layer, the second layer is thinner than the first layer, and an amount of protrusion of the end portion (206) of the upper portion (110B) from a lower end of the side surface (111) of the lower portion (110A) is less than or equal to 2.0 µm. However, Zhao discloses in FIG. 24 a display device comprising: a partition (layers 1401/1402/202/1403/1404/203; [0083]; [0115] and [0126]) provided on a rib (1405; [0120]), wherein the partition (layers 1401/1402/202/1403/1404/203) comprises a lower portion (layers 1401/1402/202/1403) provided on the rib (1405), and an upper portion (layers 1404/203) provided on the lower portion (layers 1401/1402/202/1403); and the upper portion (layers 1404/203) includes a first layer (layers 1404) formed of silicon oxide ([0118]) and a second layer (layers 203) formed of conductive oxide (ITO or IZO; [0126]); and wherein the second layer (203) is thinner (5 nm for 203 vs. 20 nm for 1404; [0120] and [0126]) than the first layer (1404). Thus, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the structure of Choung by adding the conductive oxide layer of Zhao, using the thicknesses of the upper portion of Zhao, such that the upper portion (110B) includes: a first layer; and a second layer covering the first layer, the second layer is thinner than the first layer, providing electric field interference protection to the display device (Zhao; [0111] and [0126]). B. Choung and Zhao fail to disclose and an amount of protrusion of the end portion (206) of the upper portion (110B) from a lower end of the side surface (111) of the lower portion (110A) is less than or equal to 2.0 µm. However, Choung 417 discloses in FIG. 2B a display device comprising: an amount of protrusion (203; [0038] and [0048]) of an end portion (206; [0038]) of an upper portion (110B; [0038]) from a lower end (at 103) of a side surface (at 226; [0040]) of a lower portion (110A; [0040]) is less than or equal to 2.0 µm (0.5 to 1 µm; [0048]). Thus, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the structure of Choung and Zhao by using the protrusion profile of Choung 417, such that an amount of protrusion of the end portion (206) of the upper portion (110B) from a lower end of the side surface (111) of the lower portion (110A) is less than or equal to 2.0 µm, for a shadowing effect during evaporation deposition, for each of the OLED material and the cathode such the OLED material does not contact the overhang structures and the cathode contacts at least a portion of a sidewall of the base portion of the overhang structures (Choung 417; [0020]). Re claim 2, Choung discloses the display device of claim 1, wherein the upper portion (110B) has translucency (transmission of light) relative to light having a wavelength of 436 nm (oxide of silicon SiO2 is well-known to transmit visible light from 400-700 nm; MPEP § 2144.03) or light having a wavelength of 405 nm (oxide of silicon SiO2 is well-known to transmit visible light from 400-700 nm; MPEP § 2144.03). Re claim 3, Choung discloses the display device of claim 1, wherein the first layer (entirety of 110B) formed of silicon oxide (oxide of silicon e.g. SiO2; [0028] and [0031]). But, fails to disclose wherein the second layer formed of conductive oxide. However, Zhao discloses partition (layers 1401/1402/202/1403/1404/203; [0083]; [0115] and [0126]) provided on a rib (1405; [0120]), wherein the partition (layers 1401/1402/202/1403/1404/203) comprises a lower portion (layers 1401/1402/202/1403) provided on the rib (1405), and an upper portion (layers 1404/203) provided on the lower portion (layers 1401/1402/202/1403); and the upper portion (layers 1404/203) includes a first layer (layers 1404) formed of silicon oxide ([0118]) and a second layer (layers 203) formed of conductive oxide (ITO or IZO; [0126]). Thus, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the structure of Choung by adding the conductive oxide layer of Zhao, using the thicknesses of the upper portion of Zhao, such that the upper portion includes a first layer formed of silicon oxide and a second layer formed of conductive oxide, providing electric field interference protection to the display device (Zhao; [0111] and [0126]), as would be part of the electric field interference protection discussed for claim 1. Re claim 6, Choung and Zhao disclose the display device of claim 3, wherein the conductive oxide (Zhao) forming the second layer (203) is ITO ([0126]), IZO ([0126]) or IGZO, as would be part of the electric field interference protection discussed for claim 3. Re claim 8, Choung discloses the display device of claim 1, wherein the lower portion (110A) contains aluminum ([0030]-[0031]). Re claim 9, Choung discloses the display device of claim 1, wherein the lower portion (110A) includes a barrier layer (202; [0033] and [0042]) provided on the rib (126), and a metal (copper, titanium, aluminum, molybdenum or silver of 110A; [0030]-[0031]) layer provided on the barrier layer (202). Re claim 10, Choung discloses the display device of claim 9. But, fails to disclose wherein the barrier layer (202) is formed of one of molybdenum, molybdenum tungsten alloy and copper. However, Choung 417 discloses a barrier layer (110A; [0028]) provided on a rib (126; [0026]), wherein the barrier layer (110A) is formed of one of molybdenum ([0028]), molybdenum tungsten alloy and copper ([0028]). Thus, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the structure of Choung by using the molybdenum or copper of Choung 417 as a substitutional conductive equivalent (MPEP § 2144.06) for the conductive chromium, titanium, aluminum, ITO, or a combination thereof barrier of Choung for the barrier layer. Re claim 11, Choung discloses the display device of claim 1, wherein the side surface (111) of the lower portion (110A) comprises projections (due to natural surface roughness) and depressions (due to natural surface roughness). Re claim 12, Choung discloses the display device of claim 1, wherein the sealing layer (116) is formed of silicon nitride (Si3N4; [0034]). Conclusion 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 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. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ERIC W JONES whose telephone number is (408) 918-9765. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:00 AM - 6:00 PM PT. 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, N. Drew Richards can be reached at (571) 272-1736. 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. /ERIC W JONES/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2892
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Feb 06, 2023
Application Filed
Oct 01, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Feb 03, 2026
Response Filed
Feb 24, 2026
Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12604617
DISPLAY DEVICE INCLUDING PROTECTIVE MEMBER AND METHOD OF MANUFACTURING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12598883
DISPLAY APPARATUS INCLUDING TANDEM ORGANIC LIGHT-EMITTING DIODE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12593583
DISPLAY DEVICE WITH LIGHT EMISSION SEPARATION LAYERS OF DIFFERING THICKNESSES
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12593598
DISPLAY APPARATUS HAVING DAM STRUCTURES AND AN INSULATING MATERIAL AND METHOD OF MANUFACTURING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12593568
METAL OVERHANG FOR ADVANCED PATTERNING
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 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
61%
Grant Probability
79%
With Interview (+17.9%)
3y 3m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 685 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