Prosecution Insights
Last updated: August 18, 2026
Application No. 18/285,529

Display Apparatus

Final Rejection §102§103
Filed
Oct 04, 2023
Priority
Apr 08, 2021 — JP 2021-066108 +2 more
Examiner
SANTIAGO, MARICELI
Art Unit
2896
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Semiconductor Energy Laboratory Co., Ltd.
OA Round
2 (Final)
81%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
0m
Est. Remaining
89%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 81% — above average
81%
Career Allowance Rate
836 granted / 1034 resolved
+12.9% vs TC avg
Moderate +8% lift
Without
With
+8.3%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 3m
Avg Prosecution
34 currently pending
Career history
1062
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.4%
-39.6% vs TC avg
§103
44.9%
+4.9% vs TC avg
§102
37.0%
-3.0% vs TC avg
§112
13.5%
-26.5% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1034 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 . Response to Amendment Receipt of the Amendment, filed on May 19, 2026, is acknowledged. Cancellation of claims 2-23 has been entered. Claim 1 is pending in the instant application. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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)(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. Claim(s) 1 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Cheng et al. (CN 113077722 A). Regarding claim 1, Cheng discloses a display apparatus comprising: a framework (21); and one display panel (11) fixed or held to the framework, wherein the one display panel comprises a spherical surface or a substantially spherical surface (Figs. 3-4). 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. Claim(s) 1 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over in view of Hong (US 2019/0102013 A1) in view of Hwang et al. (US 2020/0168133 A1). Regarding claim 1, Cheng discloses a display apparatus comprising: one display panel (10”), wherein the one display panel comprises a spherical surface or a substantially spherical surface (Fig. 9). Cheng fails to state a framework and the display panel fixed or held to the framework. Hwang discloses a display apparatus comprising: a framework (20, Fig. 3), one display panel (10), wherein the display panel fixed or held to the framework (Fig. 3), the framework helps support the spherical shape of the display. Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filling of the claimed invention to incorporate the framework disclosed by Hwang in the display apparatus of Cheng in order to help support the spherical shape of the display. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 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. 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. Conclusion The rejections above rely on the references for all the teachings expressed in the text of the references and/or one of ordinary skill in the art would have reasonably understood or implied from the texts of the references. To emphasize certain aspects of the prior art, only specific portions of the texts have been pointed out. Each reference as a whole should be reviewed in responding to the rejection, since other sections of the same reference and/or various combinations of the cited references may be relied on in future rejections in view of amendments. Contact Information Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Mariceli Santiago whose telephone number is (571) 272-2464. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday from 8:00 AM to 4:00 PM. 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, James R. Greece, can be reached on (571) 272-3711. 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. /Mariceli Santiago/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2879
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Oct 04, 2023
Application Filed
Feb 20, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §102, §103
May 19, 2026
Response Filed
Jun 03, 2026
Final Rejection mailed — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12707851
DISPLAY PANEL AND DISPLAY APPARATUS
3y 1m to grant Granted Aug 11, 2026
Patent 12696646
DISPLAY PANEL AND DISPLAY DEVICE
3y 3m to grant Granted Jul 28, 2026
Patent 12696660
DISPLAY DEVICE
2y 11m to grant Granted Jul 28, 2026
Patent 12696653
DISPLAY DEVICE AND DISPLAY DEVICE MANUFACTURING METHOD
2y 8m to grant Granted Jul 28, 2026
Patent 12686613
MEMS DEVICE
3y 1m to grant Granted Jul 21, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
81%
Grant Probability
89%
With Interview (+8.3%)
2y 3m (~0m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 1034 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance 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