Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/191,391

DISPLAY DEVICE

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Mar 28, 2023
Examiner
CHEEK, EDWARD RHETT
Art Unit
2813
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Samsung Display Co., Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
81%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 4m
To Grant
96%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 81% — above average
81%
Career Allow Rate
50 granted / 62 resolved
+12.6% vs TC avg
Strong +16% interview lift
Without
With
+15.8%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 4m
Avg Prosecution
29 currently pending
Career history
91
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§103
54.4%
+14.4% vs TC avg
§102
17.5%
-22.5% vs TC avg
§112
25.9%
-14.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 62 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 . Election/Restrictions Applicant’s election without traverse of Species 1 in the reply filed on 11/17/2025 is acknowledged. Claims 7-11 and 18-21 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 11/17/2025. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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 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. (a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claims 1 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US patent publication US 20180374409 A1 (Lee et al hereinafter Lee). Regarding claim 1, Lee discloses a display apparatus (the display apparatus of FIG. 9 ¶ [0102]) comprising: first sub-pixels of a first color (FIG. 9, red sub-pixels such as the central sub-pixel in the illustration ¶ [0095]), second sub-pixels of a second color (FIG. 9, green sub-pixels such as the left sub-pixel in the illustration ¶ [0095]), and third sub-pixels of a third color (FIG. 9, blue sub-pixels such as the right sub-pixel in the illustration ¶ [0095]) which are apart from each other with a non-pixel area (FIG. 9, there is a non-pixel area spaced between the lower electrodes 10 and color controller 201’s discrete layers) disposed between the first sub-pixels, the second sub-pixels, and the third sub-pixels; organic light-emitting diodes (FIG. 9, OLED substrate 101 has OLEDs ¶ [0104]) disposed over a lower substrate (FIG. 9, TFT array substrate 1 ¶ [0103]) to correspond to the first sub-pixels, the second sub-pixels, and the third sub-pixels, respectively, and each comprising: a first electrode (FIG. 9, each of the sub-pixels includes one of first electrodes 10a, 10b, or 10c ¶ [0104]); at least two emission layers emitting light of different colors (FIG. 9, light emitting layers 20, 30, and 40 emit both blue and green light ¶ [0104]); and a second electrode (FIG. 9, second electrode 50 ¶ [0104]); a color conversion layer (FIG. 9, second color control element 70b disposed over electrode 10b which defines the first/red sub-pixel ¶ [0083]) disposed over one of the organic light-emitting diodes corresponding to one of the first sub-pixels, and comprising quantum dots (second color control element 70b includes quantum dots for red conversion ¶ [0083]) converting incident light into light of the first color; a first color filter (FIG. 9, second color filter 80b disposed over color control element 70b ¶ [0083]) disposed over the color conversion layer and transmitting light of the first color (FIG. 9, second color filter 80b transmits red light ¶ [0085]); a first transmission layer (FIG. 9, light transmits through first color control element 70a disposed over electrode 10a which defines the second/green sub-pixel ¶ [0083]) disposed over one of the organic light-emitting diodes corresponding to one of the second sub-pixels; a second color filter (FIG. 9, first color filter 80a disposed over color control element 70a ¶ [0083]) disposed over the first transmission layer and transmitting light of the second color different from the first color (FIG. 9, first color filter 80a transmits green light ¶ [0085]); a second transmission layer (FIG. 9, light scattering element 71c disposed over electrode 10c which defines the third/blue sub-pixel ¶ [0091]) disposed over one of the organic light-emitting diodes corresponding to one of the third sub-pixels; and a third color filter (FIG. 9, third color control element 75c disposed over light scattering element 71c transmits blue light ¶ [0084]) disposed over the second transmission layer and transmitting light of the third color different from the first color and the second color, and a material of the first transmission layer (first color control element 70a includes both a resin and light scattering particles ¶ [0084]) is identical to a material of the second transmission layer (light scattering element 71c includes both a resin and light scattering particles, either of which may be the identical material ¶ [0091]; the claim does not require that the first and second transmission layers consist entirely of identical materials, with neither having even one material that the other lacks). Regarding claim 6, Lee discloses the limitations of claim 1 as detailed above, and further discloses that the organic light-emitting diodes emit blue light and green light (FIG. 9, light emitting layers 20, 30, and 40 emit both blue and green light ¶ [0104]), and the quantum dots convert incident light into red light (second color control element 70b includes quantum dots for red conversion ¶ [0083]). 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. The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows: 1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art. 2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue. 3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art. 4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness. 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. Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US patent publication US 20180374409 A1 (Lee et al hereinafter Lee) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of US 20200373359 A1 (Lee et al hereinafter Lee 2). Lee discloses the limitations of claim 1 as detailed above, but does not further disclose that a column spacer is arranged between two adjacent third sub-pixels among the third sub-pixels. However, Lee 2 discloses a display device (display panel DP, a cross-section of which is shown in FIG. 4A ¶ [0046-0047]) wherein a column spacer (FIG. 4A, wall base BK-SB is a spacer having a column shape ¶ [0098-0099]) is arranged between two adjacent third sub-pixels (FIG. 3 illustrates that instances of light emitting region PXA-B are arranged, and FIG. 4A further illustrate that wall base BK-SB would be located between multiple instances of light emitting region PXA-B) among a plurality of third sub-pixels (FIGS. 3-4A, instances of light emitting region PXA-B form a plurality of third sub-pixels ¶ [0058-0060]). Lee 2 also teaches that their wall structure having a reflective layer and a spacer layer enables an improvement to luminous efficiency and brightness in the device (¶ [0158]). Lee and Lee 2 both pertain to the field of display devices, placing them in the same field of endeavor as the claimed invention. Therefore, a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have found it obvious to modify the device of Lee in view of Lee 2 to include the wall structure of Lee 2 such that a column spacer is arranged between two adjacent third sub-pixels among the third sub-pixels, in order to improve the luminous efficiency and brightness in the device. Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee in view of Lee 2 as applied to claim 3 above, and further in view of US patent publication US 20210066399 A1 (Bae et al hereinafter Bae). Lee in view of Lee 2 discloses the limitations of claim 3 as detailed above, but did not explicitly state that the column spacer, the first transmission layer, and the second transmission layer comprise a same material. However, Lee taught that the first transmission layer and the second transmission layer comprise a same resin material (Lee ¶ [0084, 0091]), and Lee 2 taught that the column spacer included a polymer resin material (¶ 0102]). In addition, Bae discloses a display device (title, abstract, FIGS. 1A-2B) and teaches that a polymer resin is a suitable base resin for the color conversion layers and transmission layers (¶ [0083, 0118]). Lee, Lee 2, and Bae all pertain to the field of display devices, placing them in the same field of endeavor as the claimed invention. Therefore, a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have found it obvious to modify the device of Lee in view of Lee 2 and Bae such that the same polymer resin material is used in both the column spacers and the transmission layers, such that the column spacer, the first transmission layer, and the second transmission layer comprise a same material, in order to provide a suitable base resin for the transmission layers, taking into consideration materials costs and changing market conditions. Claims 12-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of US patent publication US 20210104578 A1 (Jo et al hereinafter Jo). Regarding claim 12, Lee discloses the limitations of claim 1 as detailed above, but does not further disclose a capping layer, wherein a first portion of the capping layer is disposed on a lower surface of the color conversion layer, a second portion of the capping layer is disposed on an upper surface of the first transmission layer, and a third portion of the capping layer is disposed on an upper surface of the second transmission layer. However, Jo discloses a display device (FIGS. 1A-2B, display device 1 which includes color panel 10 ¶ [0040-0041]) comprising a capping layer (FIG. 2B, barrier layers 170 and 180 form a capping layer ¶ [0058]), wherein a first portion of the capping layer is disposed on a lower surface of a color conversion layer (FIG. 2B, wherein the orientation is vertically flipped so that the color filters 130abc are above light conversion/transmission layers 140abc as in the figures of Lee, second barrier layer 180 is on a lower surface of color conversion portion 140a ¶ [0058]), a second portion of the capping layer is disposed on an upper surface of a first transmission layer (FIG. 2B, wherein the orientation is vertically flipped so that the color filters 130abc are above light conversion/transmission layers 140abc as in the figures of Lee, first barrier layer 170 is on an upper surface of color conversion portion 140c, which transmits green light ¶ [0058]), and a third portion of the capping layer is disposed on an upper surface of a second transmission layer (FIG. 2B, wherein the orientation is vertically flipped so that the color filters 130abc are above light conversion/transmission layers 140abc as in the figures of Lee, first barrier layer 170 is on an upper surface of transmission portion 140b ¶ [0058]). A person of ordinary skill in the art would also recognize that including the capping layer would insulate the color conversion and transmission layers’ materials and protect them from contaminants such as oxygen or moisture, since the capping layer is formed of known insulation materials such as silicon oxide or silicon nitride (¶ [0058]). Lee and Jo both pertain to the field of display devices, placing them in the same field of endeavor as the claimed invention. Therefore, a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have found it obvious to modify the device of Lee in view of Jo such that it includes a capping layer, wherein a first portion of the capping layer is disposed on a lower surface of the color conversion layer, a second portion of the capping layer is disposed on an upper surface of the first transmission layer, and a third portion of the capping layer is disposed on an upper surface of the second transmission layer, in order to insulate the materials of the color conversion and transmission layers and protect them from contaminants such as oxygen or moisture. Regarding claim 13, Lee in view of Jo discloses the limitations of claim 12 as detailed above, and they further disclose that the capping layer comprises a light-transmissive inorganic material (first and second barrier layers 170 and 180 both are formed of a inorganic insulating material such as silicon oxide, silicon nitride, or silicon oxynitride, which transmit light ¶ [0058]). Allowable Subject Matter Claims 14-17 and 22 are allowed. Claims 2 and 4 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Cited Prior Art The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: US patent publications US 20210074770 A1 and US 20180088404 A1. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to EDWARD RHETT CHEEK whose telephone number is (571)272-3461. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 7:30am - 5pm, Every other Friday 8:30am - 5pm. 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. /E.R.C./Examiner, Art Unit 2813 /STEVEN B GAUTHIER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2813
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Mar 28, 2023
Application Filed
Dec 15, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12604611
DISPLAY DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12604606
DISPLAY DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12598746
SEMICONDUCTOR STORAGE DEVICE AND METHOD OF MANUFACTURING SEMICONDUCTOR STORAGE DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12557476
DISPLAY SUBSTRATE AND MANUFACTURING METHOD THEREFOR, AND DISPLAY DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Patent 12550619
TECHNIQUES FOR MRAM MTJ TOP ELECTRODE CONNECTION
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 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

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
81%
Grant Probability
96%
With Interview (+15.8%)
3y 4m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 62 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