Office Action Predictor
Last updated: April 16, 2026
Application No. 18/300,824

ELECTRO-OPTIC DISPLAY STACKS WITH SEGMENTED ELECTRODES AND METHODS OF MAKING THE SAME

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Apr 14, 2023
Examiner
THOMAS, BRANDI N
Art Unit
2872
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
E Ink Corporation
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
82%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 10m
To Grant
86%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 82% — above average
82%
Career Allow Rate
897 granted / 1089 resolved
+14.4% vs TC avg
Minimal +4% lift
Without
With
+3.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 10m
Avg Prosecution
24 currently pending
Career history
1113
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.4%
-39.6% vs TC avg
§103
58.5%
+18.5% vs TC avg
§102
33.3%
-6.7% vs TC avg
§112
6.3%
-33.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1089 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 . Information Disclosure Statement Acknowledgement is made of receipt of Information Disclosure Statement(s) (PTO-1449) filed 05/02/2023, 07/07/2023, and 09/12/2023. An initialed copy is attached to this Office Action. 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. The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action. Claim(s) 1, 10-11, and 17-21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over LeCain et al. (2004/0027327), hereinafter LeCain in view of Kishi Masahiro et al. (JP 2007184236), hereinafter ‘236. Regarding claim 1, LeCain discloses, in figure 2, a method of manufacturing a segmented electro-optic display (sealed electro-optic display; paragraphs 0068 and 0100), the method comprising: providing an electro-optic display stack (10, laminate; paragraph 0112) comprising: a first substrate layer (28, release layer) (paragraph 0114); a first layer of light-transmissive electrically-conductive material (30, thin second conductive layer) (paragraph 0115; paragraph 0035 discloses a light transmissive electrically-conductive layer); a layer of an electro-optic material (16, electro-optic medium) (paragraph 0113); a lamination adhesive layer (26, lamination adhesive) (paragraph 0114); a second layer of light-transmissive electrically-conductive material (14, light-transmissive electrically-conductive layer) (paragraph 0112); and a second substrate layer (12, substrate) (paragraphs 0012 and 0113); forming a plurality of electrically-isolated conductive segments (204, conductive via) on the second layer of light-transmissive electrically-conductive material (14, light-transmissive electrically-conductive layer) (paragraph 0134) using a laser etching process (paragraph 0124 disclose using a laser cutter), the laser etching process comprising: irradiating the second substrate layer and the second layer of light-transmissive electrically-conductive material at a plurality of locations with a laser emitting light (paragraph 0131 discloses the vias are formed in the peripheral areas of the display), wherein the second substrate layer is substantially transmissive of light within a range of wavelengths (paragraph 0101 discloses the term "light-transmissive" is used herein to mean that the layer thus designated transmits sufficient light to enable an observer, looking through that layer, to observe the change in display states of the electro-optic medium). LeCain does not disclose wherein the second substrate layer is substantially transmissive of light within the first range of wavelengths and the light-transmissive electrically-conductive material of the second layer of light-transmissive electrically-conductive material is substantially absorptive of light within the first range of wavelengths, and wherein, at each of the plurality of locations: the second substrate layer substantially transmits the light within the first range of wavelengths, and the light-transmissive electrically-conductive material of the second layer of light-transmissive electrically-conductive material substantially absorbs the light within the first range of wavelengths and is removed. ‘236 discloses wherein the second substrate layer (glass substrate) is substantially transmissive of light within the first range of wavelengths (paragraphs 0004-0005 discloses glass substrate with a transparent conductive film that can be easily patterned with a laser while avoiding damages to the substrate during the laser patterning; paragraph 0006 discloses a wavelength of 1064nm; Examiner notes that 1064nm falls within the present application’s first range of 940nm-1440nm as seen in paragraph 0046) and the light-transmissive electrically-conductive material of the second layer of light-transmissive electrically-conductive material is substantially absorptive of light within the first range of wavelengths (paragraph 0007 discloses a glass substrate having a transparent conductive film having an absorbance between 5% and 20% at a wavelength of 1064nm), and wherein, at each of the plurality of locations: the second substrate layer substantially transmits the light within the first range of wavelengths, and the light-transmissive electrically-conductive material of the second layer of light-transmissive electrically-conductive material substantially absorbs the light within the first range of wavelengths and is removed (paragraphs 0007 discloses (paragraph 0007 discloses the substrate being substantially more transmissive at this wavelength and follows directly from the formula as disclosed in paragraph 0007; paragraph 0007 discloses a glass substrate having a transparent conductive film having an absorbance between 5% and 20% at a wavelength of 1064nm). Therefore 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 device of LeCain with the transmission of light at a first range of wavelengths and absorption of light within the first range of wavelengths of ‘236 for the purpose of avoiding any damage to the substrate when patterning second layer of light-transmissive electrically-conductive material. Regarding claim 10, LeCain disclose a segmented electro-optic display formed using the method of claim 1 (figure 21). Regarding claim 11, ‘236 discloses wherein the first range of wavelengths is between 940 nm and 1440 nm (paragraph 0007 discloses a wavelength of 1064nm which falls within the claimed range). Regarding claim 17, ‘236 discloses wherein the light-transmissive electrically-conductive material of the second layer of light-transmissive electrically-conductive material is 80% or less transmissive of light within the first range of wavelengths (paragraph 0007 discloses a wavelength of 1064nm). Regarding claim 18, LeCain discloses wherein the light within the first range of wavelengths breaks the light-transmissive electrically-conductive material of the second layer of light-transmissive electrically-conductive material into discontinuous pieces at each of the plurality of locations (paragraph 0139 discloses the electrodes are segment pixel electrodes). Regarding claim 19, LeCain discloses wherein the light within the first range of wavelengths oxidizes the light-transmissive electrically-conductive material of the second layer of light-transmissive electrically-conductive material into discontinuous pieces at each of the plurality of locations (paragraph 0163 discloses the electrodes are electrically isolated pixel electrodes). Regarding claim 20, ‘236 discloses wherein the laser emitting light in the first range of wavelengths is a YAG or Ytterbium doped fiber laser (‘236 discloses the use of a Ne-YAG laser). Regarding claim 21, ‘236 discloses wherein the laser emitting light in the second range of wavelengths is a CO2 laser (‘236 discloses CO2 laser). Claim(s) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over LeCain et al. (2004/0027327), hereinafter LeCain in view of Kishi Masahiro et al. (JP 2007184236), hereinafter ‘236 as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Lan, Hoa (CN 113655670), hereinafter Lan. Regarding claim 2, LeCain discloses wherein the electro-optic display stack further comprises a first barrier layer (paragraph 0112), a first adhesive layer (paragraph 0114). LeCain does not disclose a second adhesive layer a second barrier layer. Lan discloses a second adhesive layer (160, second adhesive layer) a second barrier layer (170, second water-oxygen barrier layer). PNG media_image1.png 263 430 media_image1.png Greyscale Allowable Subject Matter Claims 3-9, 12-16, and 22 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. The prior art taken either singularly or in combination fails to anticipate or fairly suggest the limitations of the independent claim(s), in such a manner that a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 102 or 103 would be proper. The prior art fails to teach a combination of all the claimed features as presented in claim(s) 3, wherein the claimed invention comprises, in claim 3, wherein the laser etching process further comprises irradiating the second adhesive layer and the second barrier layer at the plurality of locations with the laser emitting light within the first range of wavelengths, wherein the second adhesive layer and the second barrier layer are substantially transmissive of light within the first range of wavelengths, and wherein, at each of the plurality of locations, the second adhesive layer and the second barrier layer substantially transmit the light within the first range of wavelengths; in claim 6, forming a plurality of electrically-isolated conductive segments on the first layer of light-transmissive electrically-conductive material using a second laser etching process and the first substrate layer substantially transmits the light within the first range of wavelengths, and the light-transmissive electrically-conductive material of the first layer of light-transmissive electrically-conductive material substantially absorbs the light within the fourth range of wavelengths and is removed; in claim 9, irradiating the electro-optic display stack at a fifth plurality of locations with a laser emitting light within a fifth range of wavelengths, wherein each layer of the electro-optic display stack is substantially absorptive of light within the fifth range of wavelengths, and wherein, at each of the second plurality of locations, the layers of the electro-optic display stack substantially absorb the light within the fifth range of wavelengths and are removed, as claimed. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRANDI N THOMAS whose telephone number is (571)272-2341. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 7:30 - 3:30. 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, Stephone Allen can be reached at 571-272-2434. 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. /BRANDI N THOMAS/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2872
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Apr 14, 2023
Application Filed
Nov 14, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103
Mar 10, 2026
Interview Requested
Mar 18, 2026
Examiner Interview Summary
Mar 18, 2026
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12601897
OPTICAL LENS ASSEMBLY
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12585168
ZOOMING ACTUATOR HAVING DUAL STRUCTURE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12575730
OPHTHALMIC SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR CLINICAL DEVICE USING TRANSCLERAL ILLUMINATION WITH MULTIPLE POINTS SOURCE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12564319
METHODS AND SYSTEMS FOR QUANTITATIVE OCULAR SURFACE DIAGNOSTICS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Patent 12564322
Head-Mounted System for Measuring Ptosis
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 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
82%
Grant Probability
86%
With Interview (+3.9%)
2y 10m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1089 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in for Full Analysis

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month