Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/211,095

DISPLAY APPARATUS AND CONTROL METHOD THEREOF

Final Rejection §112
Filed
Jun 16, 2023
Examiner
WILSON, DOUGLAS M
Art Unit
2622
Tech Center
2600 — Communications
Assignee
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.
OA Round
6 (Final)
75%
Grant Probability
Favorable
7-8
OA Rounds
2y 9m
To Grant
91%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 75% — above average
75%
Career Allow Rate
320 granted / 427 resolved
+12.9% vs TC avg
Strong +16% interview lift
Without
With
+16.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 9m
Avg Prosecution
25 currently pending
Career history
452
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.9%
-38.1% vs TC avg
§103
56.5%
+16.5% vs TC avg
§102
22.5%
-17.5% vs TC avg
§112
14.4%
-25.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 427 resolved cases

Office Action

§112
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 . Claims 20-33 are pending. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. 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. Claims 20-33 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim 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, at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. Regarding Claim 20. Claim 20 contains the following subject matter: “a communication interface comprising circuitry configured to receive content; and a processor configured to: based on a frame rate of the received content being identical to a first frame rate, adjust the received content to a first resolution by changing horizontal resolution and vertical resolution of the received content, control the display panel to display the content of the first resolution at the first frame rate”. Applicant discloses performing the following operations as a result of determining “a frame rate of the received content being identical to a first frame rate”: [0020] The processor may, based on a frame rate of the content being identical with the first frame rate, be configured to increase the frame rate of the content by performing frame interpolation on the content, and to adjust the content with the frame rate increased to the second resolution. [0114] In the above, the frame rate of the content being greater than the first frame rate has been described, but the embodiment is not limited thereto, and the processor 120 may, based on the frame rate of the content being identical with the first frame rate, increase the frame rate of the content by performing frame interpolation on the content, and adjust the content with the increased frame rate to a second resolution. [0191] Based on the frame rate of the content being identical with the first frame rate, performing frame interpolation on the content to increase the frame rate of the content may be further included, and the adjusting (S820) may include adjusting the content to which the frame rate is increased to the second resolution. Claim 8. The display apparatus of claim 2, wherein the processor is configured to: based on a frame rate of the content being identical to the first frame rate, increase the frame rate of the content by performing frame interpolation on the content, and adjust the horizontal resolution of the received content and vertical resolution of the received content. Claim 17. The method of claim 11, further comprising: based on a frame rate of the content being identical to the first frame rate, increasing the frame rate of the content by performing frame interpolation on the content, and wherein the adjusting comprises adjusting the horizontal resolution of the received content and vertical resolution of the received content. Claim 20 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, at the time the application was filed, had possession of an invention, that adjusts the resolution of received content and displays the content at the first frame rate, after determining the received content frame rate is identical to a first frame rate. Therefore Claim 20 ius rejected under 35 USC §112(a) as new matter. Regarding Claim 27. Claim 27 contains essentially the same subject matter as Claim 20 therefore Claim 27 is also rejected under 35 USC §112(a) as new matter. Regarding Claims 21-26, and 28-33. Claims 21-26, and 28-33 are rejected under 35 USC §112(a) for containing the new matter of their respective parent claim. 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 Douglas Wilson whose telephone number is (571)272-5640. The Examiner can normally be reached 1100-1800 EST. 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, Patrick Edouard can be reached at 571-272-7603. 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. /Douglas Wilson/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2622
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 16, 2023
Application Filed
Apr 02, 2024
Non-Final Rejection — §112
Jul 08, 2024
Response Filed
Aug 30, 2024
Final Rejection — §112
Nov 03, 2024
Interview Requested
Nov 18, 2024
Examiner Interview Summary
Nov 18, 2024
Examiner Interview (Telephonic)
Dec 01, 2024
Request for Continued Examination
Dec 05, 2024
Response after Non-Final Action
Feb 24, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Feb 25, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Feb 28, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Mar 05, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §112
Jun 10, 2025
Response Filed
Aug 01, 2025
Final Rejection — §112
Oct 06, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Oct 10, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Oct 17, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §112
Jan 21, 2026
Response Filed
Mar 30, 2026
Final Rejection — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12596431
VIRTUAL REALITY CONTENT DISPLAY SYSTEM AND VIRTUAL REALITY CONTENT DISPLAY METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12596279
ACTIVE MATRIX SUBSTRATE AND A LIQUID CRYSTAL DISPLAY
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12583317
INPUT DEVICE FOR A VEHICLE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12585480
USE OF GAZE TECHNOLOGY FOR HIGHLIGHTING AND SELECTING DIFFERENT ITEMS ON A VEHICLE DISPLAY
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12579947
DISPLAY DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 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

7-8
Expected OA Rounds
75%
Grant Probability
91%
With Interview (+16.1%)
2y 9m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 427 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